The perceptions of Liberian public school principals about their

The Perceptions of Liberian Public School Principals about their Leadership

Development Needs in Post-Conflict Liberia

A doctoral thesis presented by

Zobong Boima Norman

to the College of Professional Studies

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Education

Dr. Chris Unger

Advisor

Northeastern University

Boston, Massachusetts

November, 2012

Abstract

In 2003, Liberia emerged from a violent 14-year civil war which caused widespread

destruction of the nation’s socio-economic and educational infrastructure. Even before the war,

Liberia lacked the necessary programs and policies to effectively train public school principals

and provide them with sustainable ongoing leadership development opportunities and support

throughout their careers. This remains true today. This descriptive qualitative study explores the

perceptions of Liberian public school principals regarding their needs for leadership

development opportunities and for support that would help them to become more effective

school leaders.

Data was collected from two main sources: 1) in-depth, semi-structured interviews with

12 currently active principals in Liberia; and 2) a review of select relevant policy and program

documents. Detailed notes were subsequently analyzed to determine common and independent

themes from across the interviews. A similar analysis was done with the select policy and

program documents, which came from the Liberian government and other organizations working

in the public education domain in Liberia. Data from the two sources was analyzed in

relationship to one another to enhance the analysis.

The findings of the study indicate a real need for professional development for public

school principals, as well as for programs and policies that address their leadership development

needs in post-conflict Liberia.

Key Words: professional development, principal leadership, leadership effectiveness, principal

education, in-service training, school leadership.

Dedication

This thesis is dedicated to four persons: 1) My mother, Massa Jabono Taylor; 2) My late

grandma, Tenneh Yeajuah Guajuah; 3) My grandpa, Momo Kekeh Sasay; and 4) My aunt,

Miatha Freeman. These family members loved me deeply. Their affection and support had a

profound impact on my life and educational attainment. My late grandma, affectionately called

Yeajuah, who passed away in July 2011 in Liberia, a few weeks after I returned to the United

States from my thesis research mission to Liberia, lived a long, blessed, and fulfilling life of

more than “three score and ten.”

My grandpa, lovingly called Kekeh, has lived well beyond “three score and ten,” and is

enjoying God’s bountiful blessings of longevity. My aunt, the late Miatha Freeman, died

prematurely during childbirth in 1977. My mother, Ma Massa, my grandparents, and aunt

worked very hard to support my education and development. I lived with my grandparents, my

mother, and my aunt at different intervals of my formative childhood and adolescent years. They

did not have formal Western education, but they had great love and appreciation for its value.

My family members were, however, well educated and solidly grounded in traditional Liberian

or African education.

They invested their meager financial resources in my education and development. They

earned their living mainly from subsistence farming and small business activities. My family

instilled in me strong moral values, for which I am deeply grateful. Their exemplary lives taught

me to be respectful, hardworking, persevering, honest, and empathetic. These values have

positively influenced my life and significantly contributed to my educational achievement.

Well done Ma Massa, grandma Yeajuah, grandpa Kekeh, and aunty Miatha. I owe you a

“Mount Everest” of gratitude.

Acknowledgments

I give thanks to God for his Grace and for the strength, ability, passion, and determination

to successfully complete my doctoral study. Through his blessings, I crossed paths with many

people whose insights and help made my educational journey possible. I am extremely grateful

to Dr. Chris Unger, my lead thesis advisor, for his invaluable insights and tremendous

intellectual guidance. Dr. Unger’s demand for quality work and attitude of respect and

collaborative engagement were very instructive during the thesis writing process.

My heartfelt gratitude also goes to Dr. Kimberly Nolan, who had earlier served as lead

advisor on my thesis committee, but relinquished that responsibility due to pressing professional

commitments. However, she returned to the committee as soon as circumstances permitted in the

capacity of second reader. Among other things, Dr. Nolan was really helpful in recommending

materials relevant to the quality of the thesis, as well as providing outstanding guidance to keep

my project focused. My third reader, Dr. Cara Procek, also deserves tremendous thanks and

appreciation for her unflinching support to my thesis endeavor. In spite of her busy academic

engagements at Southern New Hampshire University, Dr. Procek reviewed my doctoral thesis

with an external lens and provided important inputs. Her appreciation and encouragement of my

work were inspiring.

This thesis and my overall academic work would not have been possible without the

unflinching support of my wife, Doris, and our children, Jonathan, Tenneh, Massa, and Faithlyn.

I deeply value their incessant love, understanding, and social support. They afforded me the

opportunity to divert valuable family time and limited resources to my educational work. For this

and many other sacrifices my family made, I am exceedingly thankful to them. I extend my

deepest gratitude to Mr. Clement Kimber, a retired educator and administrator of the Episcopal

Church of Liberia, for his innumerable assistance while I was in school and college in Liberia. I

am equally indebted to my sister, Lady-Zoe, and her husband, William Reuban Horace, Sr., of

“Upper Buchanan.” They were our backbone of assistance during our early days in the United

States. They greatly encouraged me, especially during the thesis writing aspect of my school

work.

I would like to extend special thanks to Mrs. Christine T. Norman, wife of my elder

brother Laurence Norman, for inspiring me by consistently showing genuine interests in my

educational pursuit whenever we met. Impressed by my outstanding academic performance,

“Sis” Christine, as she is affectionately called, awarded me a scholarship for high school many,

many years ago. At the time of awarding the scholarship, she did not know me, nor did she know

that we had a relationship. In a similar vein, I extend heartfelt “thank you” to my sister Jebeh and

husband Richard Klah and my brother Pete Norman for their encouragement over the years and

accommodating me during my research in Liberia. My appreciation also goes to Uncle Paultomo

Washington and his wife Bee for their help over the years and during my research mission in

Liberia.

Melvin and Alice Howard, Emmanuel and Rebecca Nyeswa, and Paul and Frances

Lavalah and their families also deserve countless thanks for their various forms of support in our

community of families over the years. I also extend my deepest appreciation to our family friend,

Charlesmond Sumo, for his continued interest in my educational endeavors and confidence in me

throughout my doctoral work. Lastly, but certainly not least, I am grateful to Dr. Nancy Yorra

and her husband Dr. Mark Yorra, who were my classmates in the foundational courses of the

doctoral program. We kept the lines of communication between us open, even after we branched

out into different concentration tracks in the program.

Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 2

Dedication .................................................................................................................................... 3

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... 4

Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... 6

Chapter I: Introduction ................................................................................................................ 9

Problem of Practice .......................................................................................................... 9

Significance of the Problem ............................................................................................. 10

Research Question ........................................................................................................... 13

Intellectual and Practical Goals ....................................................................................... 14

Background: Synopsis of Liberian History and Education .............................................. 15

Organization of Thesis ..................................................................................................... 22

Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................... 23

Chapter II: Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 26

Education and Conflict.... ............................................................................................... 26

Leadership and Development .......................................................................................... 30

Definition of Leadership .................................................................................................. 32

Theories of Leadership .................................................................................................... 32

Expectations of the Principal ........................................................................................... 39

The Role of the Principal ............................................................................................................. 40

Attributes and Competencies of the Principal ............................................................................. 46

Leadership Development through Competency Models .............................................................. 48

Developing a Competency Model ............................................................................................... 49

Leadership Development of Principals ........................................................................................ 50

Meaning of Professional Development ........................................................................................ 51

Professional Development Models .............................................................................................. 53

Leadership Development and Cultural Context ........................................................................... 59

Chapter III: Methodology ............................................................................................................ 61

Research Question ........................................................................................................... 61

Research Design............................................................................................................... 61

Study Context................................................................................................................... 62

Participants ....................................................................................................................... 63

Data Collection ................................................................................................................ 64

Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 67

Validity and Credibility ................................................................................................... 68

Protection of Human Subjects ......................................................................................... 70

Researcher Reflexivity ..................................................................................................... 71

Limitations of Study ........................................................................................................ 72

Chapter IV: Report of Research Findings ................................................................................... 74

Who Are the 12 Principals? ............................................................................................. 74

Interview Protocol Review .............................................................................................. 76

Data Coding ..................................................................................................................... 77

Emergent Categories and Themes ................................................................................... 78

School Challenges ............................................................................................................ 79

Professional Development Needs .................................................................................... 87

Principal Leadership Qualities ......................................................................................... 92

Summary of Findings ....................................................................................................... 96

Chapter V: Discussion of Research Findings and Implications.................................................. 98

Revisiting the Problem of Practice.................................................................................. 98

Review of the Methodology............................................................................................. 99

Summary of Findings .......................................................................................................104

Discussion of Findings in Relation to the Theoretical Framework .................................113

Discussion of Findings in Relation to the Literature Review ..........................................118

Final Researcher Commentary .........................................................................................121

Conclusion .......................................................................................................................128

References ....................................................................................................................................130

Appendices ...................................................................................................................................143

Appendix A ......................................................................................................................143

Appendix B ......................................................................................................................144

Appendix C ......................................................................................................................145

Appendix D ......................................................................................................................148

Appendix E ......................................................................................................................151

Appendix F.......................................................................................................................153

Appendix G ......................................................................................................................154

Appendix H ......................................................................................................................155

Appendix I .......................................................................................................................159

Appendix J .......................................................................................................................160

Chapter I: Introduction

Problem of Practice

Studies show an important link between the leadership competencies of school principals

and the success of their schools. Salazar (2007) states that if school reform efforts are to be

successful, a strong leadership must prevail. Public school principals in Liberia (Appendix I)

have faced a complex array of post-conflict rehabilitation and reform problems in the wake of

the 14-year civil war that ended in 2003. These problems include post-traumatic stress disorder,

hunger among students, student disciplinary issues, poor fringe benefits, frequently delayed

salary checks for school personnel, financial constraints and shortages of educational supplies

(International Rescue Committee, 2002).

As would be expected, these problems present serious challenges to the principals’

effective leadership and performance. These challenges are compounded by a lack of

opportunities for public school principals to receive training or otherwise acquire the

competencies that are necessary for effectively meeting their institutional leadership demands.

Fenwick and Pierce (2002), who describe the leadership abilities of principals as the passport to

success, point out that principals today have enormous responsibilities that include creating

effective relationships among staff members, acquiring and allocating resources, promoting

teacher development, improving student outcome and building mutually supportive school-

community relations.

In contrast to the educational opportunities available to teachers, there are no formal

academies in Liberia that prepare principals for the demanding responsibilities of post-conflict

public school leadership, and opportunities for regular leadership training are rare. While

Liberia’s Education Sector Master Plan of 2000-2015 mentions the need for professional

development of public school principals, the 2008 Annual Report of the Ministry of Education

(MOE), the governmental agency that runs public education in the country, did not report the

implementation of any in-service leadership skill enhancement programs or activities for

principals during that year .

In terms of pre-service preparation for public school principals, the situation in Liberia

mirrors that of other African countries where principals work in very challenging contexts. They

rarely receive appropriate preparation and “are appointed without specific preparation, receive

little or no induction, have limited access to suitable in-service training, and enjoy little support

from the local or regional bureaucracy” (Onguko, Abdalla, & Webber, 2008, p. 716). Given the

Liberian Ministry of Education’s goal of providing professional development support to public

school principals, the fact that such support is not mentioned in the 2008 Annual Report is

surprising and points to a critical need for leadership development programs and policies for

Liberian public school principals. Understanding the professional leadership development needs

of public school principals, especially from their perspectives and based on their actual

experiences, is an important step in the right policy direction.

Significance of the Problem

The need to study the leadership development needs of Liberian public school

principals—in particular, the need to learn what these principals think about the availability or

lack of programs and policies to properly prepare them for school leadership in Liberia—cannot

be overstated. This is especially true given the challenging post-conflict nature of the Liberian

educational environment and the urgent need for educational reform. Liberia, a West African

nation of 3.5 million inhabitants, ended its brutal14-year civil war in 2003 (“Liberia—No More

War,” 2005). This armed conflict devastated the country and its education system. Many

teachers and principals were killed or maimed, and many others fled the country. The education

system remains under severe stress today (International Rescue Committee, 2002).

The economy is weak. Unemployment remains a major challenge in Liberia. Wage

employment is low nationally and the percentage of people living in extreme poverty—that is,

living on less than a dollar a day—is estimated at 63.8% (UNDP, 2010).

Generally, there is a lack of trained school professionals in Liberia, and this is coupled

with increasing student achievement problems and shortages of teaching and school supplies

(Liberia’s 2000-2015 Education Master Plan, 2000). Hunger is widespread, especially among

young children and students. Despite the Liberian government’s policy of free and compulsory

primary education, about 40% of Liberia’s school-age children do not attend school (President

Ellen-Johnson Sirleaf, 2008; International Rescue Committee, 2002).

This is particularly true for younger children and girls in the rural areas. Upper primary

schooling is limited in the rural areas and secondary schooling is available mainly in the urban

areas. Unqualified teachers teach more than 65% of the children in primary and secondary

schools. Private schools are unaffordable for most Liberians, especially in the rural areas

(International Rescue Committee, 2002). A majority of the 10,000 secondary (senior high)

school students who sat the West African Examination for Senior Students (WAESS) in 2010—

6,000—failed, and this prompted the Ministry of Education to discontinue Liberia’s participation

in the regional test until 2013 (Sendolo, 2010).

The long-term success of Liberia’s reconstruction and development efforts depends

significantly on the quality of education provided to Liberian children. Adequate leadership

development and support for public school principals are critical to the success of Liberia’s

educational reform. Salazar (2007) proposes that principals need to grow and learn throughout

their careers to adapt to the changing needs of students and their schools. Principals need

professional development opportunities to continually upgrade their technical, conceptual and

human relations skills and make them more effective, more knowledgeable and more qualified to

carry out their professional responsibilities. Liberia’s 2000-2015 Education Master Plan

recognizes the fact that the efficiency and effectiveness of the education system in Liberia

depend on the ongoing development of school leaders’ skills and capabilities.

A Stanford Educational Leadership Institute study (LaPointe, Meyerson, & Darling-

Hammond, 2006) indicates that while principals are overwhelmingly expected to improve

teaching and learning, many critics—including principals themselves—have raised a litany of

concerns about the quality and effectiveness of principal leadership preparation programs at

universities and elsewhere. The study notes a disconnect between principal leadership

development programs and the real-world complexities of principals’ positions. In particular, the

knowledge base used for leadership programs is weak and outdated, and mentorships and

internships often lack depth or opportunities to test leadership skills in real circumstances. The

study also observes that admissions standards lack rigor, and as a result, too many graduates are

eventually certified but are not truly qualified to effectively lead school-wide reform.

Preparing effective principals through leadership development programs would constitute

a step toward achieving the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in Liberia.

The eight MDGs are goals that were adopted by 189 nations at a UN Millennium Summit held in

the United States in September 2000, in response to the world’s main development challenges

(UNDP, 2008). The MDGs, which the nations pledged to achieve by 2015, have education as

the number two goal. This goal aims to ensure that by 2015, children everywhere—boys and

girls alike—will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling (UNDP, 2008). The UN

reports that Liberia lacks the capacity to monitor its primary education goal and is unlikely to

achieve this goal by 2015 (UNDP, 2008).

Leadership development programs that adequately prepare public school principals are

important not only for school reform; they are also vital for Liberia’s overall socio-economic and

political development. Liberia’s Education For All (EFA) 2004-2015 National Action Plan

stresses that basic education is not restricted to “literary, numeracy, oral expression and problem

solving” skills, but also delivers knowledge that “empowers human beings to be able to take into

consideration a culture of peace, democracy and human rights” and “to become a stabilizing

member of … society and the global village” (p. 14). Effective development of public school

principals’ leadership competencies would strengthen Liberia’s education system and contribute

to the achievement of Liberia’s overall national development goals.

Research Question

To understand the level of preparedness of public school principals in post-conflict

Liberia, as well as the support they need to lead their schools effectively, this study sought to

answer the following research question: “What are Liberian public school principals’ perceived

leadership development needs in post-conflict Liberia?” This question was explored by

gathering the perspectives of Liberian principals through in-depth, semi-structured interviews

and by reviewing relevant documents produced by Liberia’s Ministry of Education along with

some international agencies that work in public education in Liberia. The study also explored

questions concerning several related issues such as the main challenges or problems that the

principals face in their work, as perceived by them.

Intellectual and Practical Goals

Intellectual goal. This study was partially driven by an intellectual goal. An intellectual

goal focuses on “understanding something—gaining insight into what is going on and why … or

answering some question that previous research has not adequately addressed” (Maxwell, 2005,

p. 21). An intellectual goal of this research was to contribute to the limited literature and

understanding of the challenges affecting principal leadership development in post-conflict

Liberia. This research project fulfilled the additional intellectual goal of meeting the requirement

of the Doctor of Education degree in Educational Administration at Northeastern University’s

College of Professional Studies.

Practical goal. A major practical goal of this study was not only to provide insights into

the perceived leadership development needs of Liberian public school principals, but also to

generate data that education leaders and policy makers can use to reform current practices and

institute new programs for preparing and supporting principals. More succinctly, the practical

goal was to produce findings that can serve as a platform for public principal leadership

development and education reform in Liberia.

As Maxwell (2005) notes, practical goals are administrative and policy-oriented, and they

seek to meet some need, to change some situation, or to achieve some objective. The intellectual

and practical goals of the present study complemented each other in providing a reason to better

understand Liberian public school principals’ views about their leadership development needs.

Through understanding the principals’ own views, the empirical findings of the study are a

potential contribution toward identifying and addressing their leadership development needs.

Background: Synopsis of Liberian History and Education

Early founding years. Liberia is located on the West Coast of Africa (Appendix J) and

is surrounded by Sierra Leone, Guinea, Cote d’Ivoire and the Atlantic Ocean. Liberia has a

population of 3.5 million people who inhabit 43,000 square miles of predominantly forested

lands (LISGIS, 2009). In 1816, with the support of their federal government, a prominent group

of United States citizens founded the American Colonization Society (ACS) with the goal of

establishing an African colony for slaves who had been freed in the United States. The ACS’s

undertaking was informed by a number of factors, including the perceived or potential problem

of unrest on the part of freed slaves and the desire to give them an opportunity to enjoy the

benefits of free government and human dignity (Hyman, 2003).

The United States Congress appropriated $100,000 to the ACS for purchasing the land in

what would become Liberia, for building homes and forts, for acquiring farm tools and paying

teachers and for helping the settlers to take care of and defend themselves (Hyman, 2003). A

U.S. Naval ship carried the first group of settlers to Liberia, and in 1822 the modern state of

Liberia was formally founded. Various indigenous groups inhabited Liberia before the arrival of

the settlers. These groups sold some of their land to the settlers in exchange for a collection of

goods that was valued at $300.00 and that included bread, tobacco, knives, forks, spoons,

gunpowder, iron pots, hats, coats, shoes, pipes, handkerchiefs, umbrellas, soap and rum.

Monrovia, the capital of Liberia, was named after the U.S. President James Monroe, who, like

Thomas Jefferson, was a member of the ACS (Hyman, 2003; Williams, 2002).

The freed blacks, who came to be known generally in Liberia as “settlers”, or “Americo-

Liberians” or “Congos”, organized institutions patterned after those of the United States. They

built homes that echoed the architectural styles of Georgia, the Carolinas and Maryland.

Liberia’s constitution was written at Harvard Law School, and Liberia’s law was codified at

Cornell University. Agents of the ACS served as governors of Liberia for many years following

Liberia’s establishment. Liberia declared its independence on July 26, 1847, becoming the first

independent black republic in Africa (Hyman, 2003; Williams, 2002). Liberia currently has 15

political subdivisions or counties.

Socio-economic and political relations. For most of Liberia’s early history, the

Americo-Liberians settled in the coastal cities while the indigenous Liberians inhabited the

hinterland. The indigenous Liberians are composed of 16 ethnic groups and constitute the

largest proportion of the country’s population. The Americo-Liberians make up only five

percent of Liberia’s population. The “settlers” established a master-slave system in Liberia and

subjected the indigenous people to harsh and unjust treatments, identical to those that had once

been imposed upon the Americo-Liberians themselves when they were slaves in the United

States (Dillon, 2007).

Hyman (2003) describes those early days as follows: The Americo-Liberians were

descendants of the repatriated slaves from America, and they were the ruling class. They were

wealthy and had nice homes, cars and other necessities and luxuries of life. They regularly sent

their children to Europe or America for college. They seldom mixed with the natives or

indigenous people. The natives were recruited to serve as servants of the Americo-Liberians.

The natives were largely poor and could not vote. The Americo-Liberians mistreated the natives

as any other ruling class would, obviously forgetting what it meant to be slaves.

Through the late 1940s, government revenues hovered around $3 million yearly.

Customs receipts and hut (home) taxes were the main sources of government income. The

Liberian economy grew significantly after World War II, especially during the 1950s and 1960s.

By the 1950s, corporate taxes and royalties from Firestone Plantation Company (the largest

rubber plantation in the world) and from multiple companies mining iron ore and extracting

timber contributed to a surge in government income (Sirleaf, 2003). Liberia’s gross domestic

product (GDP) grew from less than $36 million in the 1950s to nearly $400 million in 1969.

During this period, the country experienced an impressive trade surplus, with exports exceeding

imports in 16 of the 20 years between 1950 and 1969 (Metcalf, 1974).

The sharp rise in economic growth did not translate into real national socio-economic and

educational development. As Williams (2002) points out, although Liberia is “endowed with

minerals and other natural resources,” the country “enjoyed economic growth without

development” (p. 22). This state of affairs is largely due to the fact that most of the country’s

wealth and political power were controlled by the Americo-Liberians (Williams, 2002; Hyman,

2003).

Liberian education system. Liberia has a dual education system that consists of a

modern Western-style system introduced by the settlers and the Christian missionaries in the

early 19

century and the traditional poro and sande systems which originated among some of

the indigenous groups. The Western-style education system is a formal system that is owned and

run by the government and nonpublic institutions and individuals (Dunn-Marcus, Kollehlon,

Ngovo, & Russ, 2005; Lamptey, 1990).

For a very long time, the Americo-Liberians used education to advance and maintain

their dominance of Liberia’s socio-economic and political life and to marginalize, suppress and

deprive the indigenous people of their rights to social and economic opportunities and

meaningful participation in the country’s national political life. Shortly after Liberia declared

independence in 1847, the Americo-Liberians passed a law that prohibited the education of

indigenous people. Violations resulted in stiff penalties. The Western-style education system

that was initially implemented in Liberia was clearly meant only for the Americo-Liberians

(Dillon, 2007).

The formal Western form of education system was initially modeled after the system in

the United States with respect to structure and curriculum. The structure is based on a 6-3-3

arrangement: six years of elementary education, followed by three years each of junior high and

senior high education. However, the pedagogical approach in Liberian schools differs markedly

from that of United States schools. Liberian teachers generally emphasize memorization and do

not provide significant opportunities that encourage students to take an active part in their own

learning. Discipline in Liberian schools is generally harsh, and corporal punishment is common

(Dillon, 2007; Dunn-Marcus et al., 2005). Liberia’s formal education system is highly

centralized with respect to governance, with the Ministry of Education responsible for policy and

management of public schools.

In general, boys, urban children and Americo-Liberians receive a significantly higher

quality education than do girls, rural children and indigenous Liberians. Literacy and school

attendance rates have increased for both Americo-Liberians and indigenous Liberians since

World War II. At that time, 29% of school-age boys were enrolled in school, while the figure for

girls was 11%. By 1984, the figures for boys and girls had risen to 57% and 34%, respectively.

Over the same period, the literacy rates for males rose from 13% to 34%, and those for females

increased from 5% to 17%. The 1974 census showed that 37% of Americo-Liberian adults had

completed no formal education. The figure for indigenous adults was 83% (Dunn-Marcus et al.,

2005).

The traditional education system served many of the indigenous ethnic groups before

Liberia was formally founded, and it continues to serve them today. This system has two

institutions: the poro and sande schools. The poro school educates boys and the sande school

educates girls. Often referred to as “bush schools” because they operate away from town in

secluded forest locations, the poro and sande schools teach the boys and girls the fundamentals

of traditional culture. Students learn life skills that range from pottery making and basket

weaving to the basics of traditional agriculture, religion, politics and the art of warfare (Buor,

2001; Dunn-Marcus et al., 2005).

Dunn-Marcus et al. (2005) note that “while the traditional system of education in Liberia

is essentially a nonliterate system, it does not mean that the indigenous Liberians were

preliterate” (p. 40). The authors indicate that five non-Arabic and non-Roman scripts were

invented or developed by indigenous Liberians in the early 19

century.

As in other societies and social groupings, young indigenous Liberians are informally

educated at home and in the community; parents, relatives and other adults teach them the skills

they need to become productive members of society. Traditionally, the poro education lasted for

four years and the sande education for three years. Every child had to receive this education

before being deemed worthy to assume responsibilities. In recent decades, however, as a result

of the influence and importance of Western education and in an effort to enable indigenous youth

to attend the modern Western schools, the poro and sande schools have operated for only a few

weeks during the summer vacation months (Dunn-Marcus et al., 2005).

Education policy change. In 1912, a compulsory Education Act instituted a centralized

education system that provided free education for children between the ages of 6 and 16. The

Liberian government became more involved in the education of indigenous Liberians in the post-

WWII era, and it reorganized the school system in 1961 (Dillon, 2007).

In spite of the policy shift of extending educational opportunities to indigenous Liberians,

change in Liberia was very slow, and this has retarded the progress of educational reform.

Although Liberia subscribes to the declaration of universal education, primary education was

still far from being universal or even nearly so in the early 1980s, and only a small proportion of

the population between 12 and 20 years of age received a secondary education. This contributed

to an estimated 24% literacy rate for the population aged 5 years and older (Dillon, 2007).

Educational opportunities remained significantly inequitable in Liberia, in spite of the increased

growth of the Liberian economy that started in the mid-1950s (Lamptey, 1990).

Political instability. Tensions between the Americo-Liberians and indigenous Liberians

heightened in the 1970s as a result of indigenous Liberians’ agitations for socio-economic,

educational and political equality. The indigenous Liberians’ challenge to the ruling Americo-

Liberian class was led by a few highly educated indigenous Liberians who had returned from

advanced studies abroad. The backbone of what came to be known as a struggle for social and

political justice was comprised mainly of students enrolled at the University of Liberia, the

largest public institution of higher learning in Liberia, along with students from other educational

institutions in Monrovia (Dillon, 2007; Williams, 2002).

Dillon (2007) argues that the struggle certainly contributed to the bloody coup that

occurred on April 12, 1980. The coup, which was led by low-ranking soldiers of the Armed

Forces of Liberia, ended 133 years of political domination by Americo-Liberians and ushered in

a popular political change (Williams, 2002). President William R. Tolbert and 13 other

prominent Americo-Liberian government officials were murdered during the coup. In many

ways, the coup was unfortunate. For example, President Tolbert had been working hard to

unravel years of unequal distribution of wealth and educational opportunities in Liberia.

The coup also came as a result of President Tolbert’s moving away from “a 100% pro-

American line in foreign policy and, in so doing, [earning] the antipathy of the CIA, which had

its headquarters for the African continent in Monrovia” (Hyman, 2003, p. 21). Other U.S.

government assets in Liberia included “two sophisticated communications facilities to handle

diplomatic and intelligence traffic to and from Africa, to monitor radio and other broadcasts in

the region”, as well as to relay “a powerful Voice of America signals throughout the continent”

(p. 20). In addition, the United States Coast Guard in 1976 built an Omega navigational station

in Liberia, one of eight around the world, for guiding and monitoring shipping traffic in the

eastern Atlantic and along the west coast of Africa (Hyman, 2003).

During the Liberian military regime, U.S. aid to the country rose from $20 million in

1979 to about $95 million yearly, “for a total of between $402 and $500 million between 1981

and 1985, more than the country received during the entire previous century” (Hyman, 2003, p.

23). Despite this huge economic aid to the military regime, its leaders—all of whom came from

indigenous backgrounds—failed to deliver on the reforms that the regime had promised. In fact,

under the military junta, “mismanagement, corruption, and abuse of human rights became

rampant at an unprecedented level” (Williams, 2002, p. 23). The leader of the military junta,

Master Sergeant Samuel K. Doe, rigged the elections of 1985, which transformed him from a

military leader to a civilian leader. Charles Taylor, who later became President, started a war in

1989 that killed President Doe in late 1990. Several warring factions emerged during the course

of the armed hostilities, which finally ended in 2003 following numerous peace negotiations and

transitional governments. The civil conflict heavily damaged Liberia’s human and physical

infrastructure. Taylor assumed the Presidency in 1996 and is considered one of the worst leaders

in Liberian history (Hyman, 2003). In 2005, Madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was elected President

of Liberia, making her the first female president ever to be elected in Africa.

Education restoration challenge. Enrollment in Liberian schools has been increasing

since the end of the war. More than 2.26 million students are enrolled in preprimary, primary,

junior high and senior high schools and accelerated education programs across the country. Of

this number, the total public school enrollment is 736,957, consisting of 400,635 boys and

336,322 girls. There are 36,726 teachers in Liberia, of whom 19,017 are trained. The

student/teacher ratio is 34/1, and the ratio of students to trained teachers is 63 to 1 (International

Rescue Committee, 2002).

There are three teacher training institutes in Liberia: Kakata Rural Teacher Training

Institute (KRTTI), Zorzor Rural Teacher Training Institute (RTTI) and Webbo Rural Teacher

Training Institute (WRTTI). Unlike teachers, principals have no dedicated training institutes in

Liberia. The International Rescue Committee summarizes the challenge in a 2002 post-conflict

assessment report on education in Liberia: “Restoring an education system that is accessible to

all and promotes peace, tolerance, and equality is a massive task for Liberia as it emerges from

14 years of intermittent civil war” (International Rescue Committee, p. iii).

Organization of Thesis

This first chapter has presented an introduction, including the statement and significance

of the problem of practice, the research question, intellectual and practical goals and a

background synopsis of Liberia’s history and education. The remainder of this chapter presents

the theoretical framework that informed the design and analysis of the study. Chapter II presents

the literature review that also informed the research question and the study in general. Chapter III

presents the research design and covers the methodological issues of participant selection,

protection of human subjects, validity, limitations, data collection and analysis. Chapter IV

reports the research findings. Chapter V discusses the findings and their implications for the

effective preparation and support of public school principals in post-conflict Liberia, and

national development in general. References and appendices appear at the end of the thesis.

Theoretical Framework

This study uses two complementary areas of research that can shed light on Liberia’s

post-conflict educational environment, as well as the core leadership competencies that are

required for effective principalship, both areas of investigation that can contribute to analysis of

the findings.

Education and conflict. The first framework is comprised of the relationship between

education and conflict, the topic of an emerging research field that has increasingly attracted the

attention of education and development professionals worldwide (Paulson & Rappleye, 2007;

World Bank, 2005). The relationship between conflict and education provides a context for

understanding the complexities of education in post-war Liberia. Insight into the damage that

conflict inflicts on education can foster a deeper understanding of the complex problems that

plague public education in Liberia and a deeper appreciation of the importance of providing

principals with leadership development and support.

The literature on conflict and education raises the important question of whether

educational policy in a post-conflict context should aim at reconstructing the pre-conflict

educational infrastructure or should aim to recreate it entirely. In education reconstruction,

education actors attempt to rebuild destroyed school facilities, to address socio-psychological

issues such as post-conflict trauma and to address economic and practical issues such as teacher

recruitment. Reconstruction has for many years been the thrust of World Bank intervention in

war-ravaged countries (Paulson & Rappleye, 2007). In contrast, education recreation involves

not only rebuilding damaged schools and providing support to educators; it also takes a deeper

look at ways in which education may have contributed to the conflict and attempts to design

curricula and programs that will prevent a recurrence of the conflict (Paulson, 2009; Paulson &

Rappleye, 2007).

Leadership and development. The second conceptual framework that informs this

study relates to leadership theories and leadership development. In the context of this study,

principal leadership and development refers to the demands, roles and attributes of effective

principals along with their leadership development. The main aim of principal leadership

development is to ensure professional reflection and growth that will yield the best results with

respect to principals’ responsibilities and that over time will serve to sustain their high

performance in their communities (Diaz-Maggioli, 2003). Daresh and Playko (1992) view

principal leadership development as a three-dimensional model consisting of pre-service

preparation, induction and in-service education.

The demands and urgent need for principal leadership development provide a lens

through which the leadership development needs of Liberian public school principals can be

understood. Contemporary leadership development emphasizes the experience and practical

knowledge that practitioners need to successfully assess their problems of practice and to

effectively address them. Contemporary leadership theories encourage principals to integrate

theory and experience in the process of analyzing their problems of practice and to develop a

greater awareness of both the impact of their performance and the opportunities available for

professional growth (Hugh, 1989; Kottkamp & Osterman, 1993). In addition to informing this

study’s research question and data collection, a combined understanding of the impact of conflict

on education and of principal leadership development should create a new approach to

understanding and appreciating the post-conflict leadership development challenges that face

Liberian public school principals.

Chapter II: Literature Review

The literature review looks at previous research, literature, and policy documents that

shed light on this study’s research question. The main goal of the literature review is to create a

context for understanding the impact of conflict on education, the major strands of leadership

and leadership development theories, and the importance of adequately preparing and providing

ongoing professional training for public school principals.

Education and Conflict

The relationship between education and conflict is a growing area of interest to education

scholars, practitioners and development professionals (Paulson & Rappleye, 2007; World Bank,

2005). An understanding of this relationship can provide important insights into common

problems and issues that tend to affect post-conflict education environments like Liberia’s, as

well as a framework for answering this study’s research question. More specifically, a better

understanding of the conditions that characterize a post-conflict education landscape and the

expected role of education can shed important light on the nature and complexity of the problems

that Liberian public school principals face.

The part of the literature review that is directed at understanding the relationship between

education and conflict is guided by the question, “What are the conditions and policy focus of

education in a post-conflict country?” The objective is to investigate the impact of war on

education and the role that education plays in the aftermath of armed conflict.

Davies (2005) describes the relationship between conflict and education as one of the

most pressing contemporary global concerns. He observes, however, that this relationship—

especially the part that concerns the role of education in the perpetuation and mitigation of

conflict—is largely underemphasized and under-researched. Paulson and Rappleye (2007) and

Smith (2005) concur with Davies’ belief that the connection between education and conflict

represents an increasingly important emerging field of study.

In their examination of UNESCO data from 1980 to 1997 concerning the effect of civil

wars on education, Lai and Thyne (2007) found that civil wars are likely to lead to reduced

educational expenditures and enrollments across all levels of schooling. The researchers found

that civil wars can reduce government funding for education during and following the conflict

through both direct and indirect costs associated with that conflict.

Direct costs include military spending and the cost of rebuilding a state’s destroyed

infrastructure, including its school facilities. Indirect costs arising from the conflict include

revenue losses such as a reduction in foreign investment and tourism and also the loss of human

productivity that results from death and injury (Lai & Thyne, 2007).

Civil wars disrupt society by causing massive flights of refugees and by interrupting

social programs such as education. Armed conflicts have caused over 16.2 million deaths during

the last 50 years and have lasted over six years on average. The vast majority of armed conflicts

take place in poor countries, where governments tend to devote as many resources as possible to

military expenditures in order to prevent their collapse. Most war causalities tend to be civilians

and these include students, parents and teachers (Lai & Thyne, 2007; Thyne, 2006).

A 2005 World Bank study supports the findings of Lai and Thyne (2007). In an

extensive review of the literature, including a database of 52 countries affected by war since

1990 and a review of 12 country-specific studies, the World Bank found that the most obvious

effects of war on education are loss of life and the physical and psychological trauma

experienced by educators, students, parents, siblings and community members, either directly as

targets of the conflict or indirectly as victims in the crossfire. A war’s aftereffects on the lives of

students, parents, teachers and members of the community last long after the violent conflict

ends. This is partially attributable to artifacts of the war itself, including landmines, unexploded

ordinance and widespread arms and ammunition that are readily available. Over the last decade,

more than two million children have died as a direct consequence of armed conflict, and at least

six million more have been seriously injured or permanently disabled (World Bank, 2005).

In the aftermath of the civil wars in Cambodia and Angola, some schools will not be used

for decades because they are located in areas where the costs of demining are prohibitive, and

whole villages have been declared as no-go areas. The carnage in Cambodia left the education

system with almost no trained or experienced teachers. More than two-thirds of the teachers in

Rwanda’s primary and secondary schools either were killed or fled during the country’s civil war

(World Bank, 2005). Almost all secondary teachers in East Timor prior to its war of

independence were Indonesians, and their failure to return after the war left East Timor with

virtually no trained or qualified personnel for the secondary school system and no support for

tertiary education. An estimated 95% of classrooms were either destroyed or seriously damaged

during the Timorese war (World Bank, 2005).

With the 1989 outbreak of civil conflict in Liberia, “the Liberian educational system

collapsed completely due to the political unrest, insecurity and lack of funding; large numbers of

children did not have access to school” (International Rescue Committee, 2002, p. 7). A large

number of schools were burned, looted or damaged. Existing schools are overcrowded and

lacked basic materials such as blackboards, chalk, chairs, textbooks and the like. A similar

report from UNICEF (Li, 2007) states that approximately 50% or more of Liberia’s schools were

destroyed in the civil conflict that ravaged the country from 1989 to 2003. The quality of

instruction in the schools remained poor, with 60% of the teachers untrained. A generation of

children lost their childhood in the conflict. Over 15,000 children were conscripted, kidnapped,

pressured or duped into joining and fighting for one of the seven warring factions during the war.

At the end of the conflict, the vast majority of students in the first grade were overage; some

were as old as 20 years. About 150,000 persons died during the civil war, and over 700,000

inhabitants fled to other parts of the world as refugees. The war left 80% of Liberians living

below the poverty line (Angucia, 2009; Doyle, 2004; International Rescue Committee, 2002; Li,

2007).

Post-conflict role of education. Education plays a critical role in post-conflict societies.

As started earlier, there is an emerging research field that focuses on conflict and education. A

key question in this field is whether a ravaged education system should be reconstructed in the

post-conflict years or whether it should be recreated. Some education scholars advocate that the

education system should be recreated in the aftermath of a conflict. In contrast, the World Bank

has long placed an emphasis on post-conflict education reconstruction, focusing on

reconstructing schools, developing curriculum, paying the salaries of educators, providing school

supplies and ensuring access to education for girls (Paulson & Rappleye, 2007).

Smith (2005) concurs that the World Bank’s post-conflict priority for education has

mainly been the reconstruction of physical infrastructure. But he indicates that the World Bank

has reconsidered this emphasis and has shifted its focus from post-conflict reconstruction to

conflict sensitivity that includes education about causes and prevention of conflict. Smith states

that there is a growing recognition that reconstruction is “not simply about replacing the physical

infrastructure of schools, but that it needs to include opportunities for rebuilding human relations

and inclusive education systems” (pp. 384-385). This embrace of a multidimensional role for

education in post-conflict settings is applauded by Paulson and Rappleye (2007), who propose

that education has a critical role to play in the wider reconstruction of a post-conflict society, a

role that ranges from building peace to creating social cohesion to fostering economic

development.

Paulson (2009) cautions that “to reconstruct the same educational system as existed prior

to conflict may be to fail to respond to structures, policies, and teaching/learning processes that

may have contributed to conflict” (p.5). She advocates that the role of education should be

recreated in post-conflict contexts to become “education that strives … to transform pre-existing

structures that may have contributed towards conflict and to enable meaningful participation”

(p.5). Meaningful participation includes not only broadening access to education by affirming

education as a human right, but also ensuring that the teaching and learning processes question,

challenge and transform entrenched patterns of violence, conflict and inequality.

The post-conflict recreation of education should also be sensitive to gender, to

experiences of violence, to poverty, to language, to displacement and to trauma (Paulson, 2009).

Davies (2004) also disagrees with the idea that there should be a post-conflict reconstruction of

education that restores the pre-conflict normalcy or status quo. Davies argues for a new

normalcy that promotes peace education in schools, conflict resolution training for police and the

army and in the schools, trauma counseling, legal education, media literacy, citizenship

education and greater access for previously excluded or marginalized groups.

Definition of Leadership

The review of leadership development literature was guided by two overall questions: 1)

“What is the nature of the dominant leadership theories”, and 2) “What are the expectations of

effective principalship and what are the roles, qualities and leadership competencies that fulfill

these expectations?” While the subject of leadership has been extensively researched, it remains

one of the most enigmatic terms in the literature on organizational theory (Nohria & Khurana,

2010; Short & Greer, 2002).

Lunenburg and Ornstein (1996) write that in a review of more than 1,000 leadership

studies, Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus found more than 350 definitions of effective leadership

that provide no single clear and definitive understanding of what distinguishes leaders from non-

leaders. Another study found that 60% of the leadership studies conducted between 1910 and

1990 had no clearly stated definition of leadership and that researchers simply tended to assume

that others shared their concept of leadership (Mendenhall, Osland, Bird, Oddou, & Maznevski,

2008). Noonan (2003) suggests that having a myriad of definitions for leadership is useful in that

“defining leadership in many different ways can help you to understand leadership as a

phenomenon” (p. 4).

Clawson (2006) defines leadership as managing one’s own energy first and then the

energy of those who are being led. He suggests that when walking into an organization, it is

possible to quickly tell what the energy level is and, as a result, what the quality of the leadership

is in that organization. If the organizational energy level is low, the leadership is likely to be

weak.

Daft (2008) claims that in all the ideas and studies about leadership, three concepts stand

out: people, influence and goals. Daft views leadership as the ability to influence people to attain

goals, and he emphasizes that leadership is reciprocal and is a people activity. Lunenburg and

Ornstein (1996) similarly define leadership as influencing others to sublimate their self-interests

and to adopt the goals of a group as their own; it is about building cohesive and goal-oriented

teams.

Noonan (2003) argues that leadership lifts the human spirit, ensures the survival of

human communities and promotes the adaptation of people to their environment. Leadership

facilitates change and develops potential; it is about service and a visionary process oriented to

achieve positive results; it is neither greedy, immoral, unethical nor diminishing but is rather

active, caring, constructive, creative, playful and courageous (Noonan, 2003).

Theories of Leadership

To understand school leadership, it is important to have a grasp of leadership theories in

general, because theories of school leadership have largely been derived from the general

concept of leadership.

Trait theory. During the first half of the 20

century, research efforts to understand

successful leadership were psychological in nature. There was a perceived need for a precise

measurement of characteristics that distinguished leaders from non-leaders (Bratton, Grint, &

Nelson, 2005; Nohria & Khurana, 2010; Short & Greer, 2002). This gave rise to the trait

approach to understanding leadership, an approach that assumed that leaders were somehow

different and possessed innate and unique personal qualities, abilities, skills and/or physical

characteristics that others did not possess. It was assumed that these traits would explain why

leaders can accomplish something (namely, leading) that non-leaders cannot (Bratton, Grint, &

Nelson, 2005; Daft, 2008; Nohria & Khurana, 2010; Short & Greer, 2002). Because of the need

to select potential officers during World War I and World War II, researchers pursued leadership

trait studies and sought to find significant correlation between individuals’ traits and their

success (Bratton, Grint & Nelson, 2005).

The unique personality characteristics that comprised the leadership trait paradigm

included intelligence, honesty, self-confidence, determination, social competence, dependability,

cooperativeness, dominance, stress tolerance, eloquence, assertiveness, high energy and even

appearance (Bratton, Grint, & Nelson, 2005; Daft, 2008; Nohria & Khurana, 2010). Trait

theories are sometimes called “Great Man” theories, for two reasons. The first is that leadership

was thought to be the exclusive province of males. Second, leadership conveyed a mythical,

heroic sense of destiny, consistent with the assumption that leaders were born and not made

(Daft, 2008; Nohria & Khurana, 2010).

The universality of leadership trait theory was challenged in the second half of the 20

century. Studies found that trait theories did little to explain why some people who possessed

the unique qualities of the leadership trait paradigm did not emerge as leaders, that is, why

possession of a given set of traits did not guarantee success in leadership. As a consequence,

scholarly attention began to shift from the traits of leaders to the behaviors of leaders (Bratton,

Grint & Nelson, 2005; Nohria & Khurana, 2010).

Behavior theory. As a result of the inability of the trait theory to satisfactorily define

effective leadership, leadership research shifted its focus to the interactions of leaders with their

subordinates. Behavior theory research began in the 1950s, eliciting hundreds of studies. Two

of the most significant studies were conducted at Ohio State University and the University of

Michigan. These studies identified two behaviors that are important for leadership. The Ohio

State studies identified the two behaviors as “initiating structure or task-oriented” and

“consideration or people-oriented” behaviors (Mendenhall et al., 2008).

Task-oriented or initiating structure leadership behavior concerns the degree to which the

leader initiates activity within the group, organizes the activity and defines the approach to doing

the work. Task-oriented behavior involves, among other activities, maintaining performance

standards, meeting deadlines, making decisions about job assignments, establishing

communication and organizing work. Consideration or people-oriented leadership behavior

concerns the extent to which a leader shows concern for the welfare of his or her subordinates.

People-oriented behaviors include expressing appreciation for performance, focusing on the job

satisfaction of workers, paying attention to workers’ self-esteem levels, making workers feel

comfortable and important and listening to and valuing workers’ suggestions and ideas

(Mendenhall et al., 2008). The Ohio State studies suggest that the most effective leaders are

those who rate highly on both the task-oriented and people-oriented dimensions (Daft, 2008).

The Michigan studies compared the behavior of effective and ineffective supervisors.

The most effective supervisors were found to be those who built effective workgroups by

concentrating on the human needs of their subordinates and setting high performance goals. The

Michigan researchers used the term “employee-centered leaders” to describe leaders who set

high performance goals and who exhibited supportive behavior toward subordinates. The

Michigan research also found that the less effective leaders, which it called “job-centered

leaders”, tended to be less concerned with goal achievement and human needs than with meeting

schedules, cutting costs and maximizing production efficiency (Daft, 2008).

Nohria and Khurana (2010) explain that the behavior approach to leadership studies has

its origins in the 1930s work of Lewin, Lippitt and White, who outlined three basic leadership

styles: autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire. Like the trait studies, the large body of

behavioral research—in spite of its promise—did not identify a particular leadership style that

was universally effective. A style that was effective in one context was not always effective in

another. Leadership scholars therefore began to search for more situation-specific theories of

leadership (Nohria & Khurana, 2010).

Contingency theories. Unlike the trait and behavioral theories, contingency theories

explicitly assume that leadership varies across contexts and situations and that there may not be a

universal formula for leadership effectiveness (Nohria & Khurana, 2010). While recognizing the

importance of the traits and behavioral characteristics of leaders, contingency theory scholars

have been interested in determining the impact of contextual variables on leadership outcomes

(Mendenhall et al., 2008).

Contingency theories focus on aspects of the context such as the favorableness of the

environment for the leaders, the relative complexity of the task, the followers’ level of readiness

and the relationship between leaders and followers (Mendenhall et al., 2008). Some of the most

important contingency theories are the Least Preferred Coworker model, the Path-Goal Theory

of leadership, Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory and the Leader Substitute

Theory (Mendenhall et al., 2008).

Least preferred coworker model. The Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) leadership

model was developed by Fred Fiedler, who is widely respected as the father of contingency

theories of leadership. The LPC model suggests that three situational variables are critical to

determining leadership effectiveness: the leader’s personal relations with the members of his or

her group, the degree of structure in the task that the group has to perform and the level of power

and authority that is available to the leader. The LPC model assumes that the most favorable

situation for effective leadership is one in which the leader has good relations with his or her

followers, has strong power in his or her position and has a well-defined and well-coordinated

job or task structure in place (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2000).

Conversely, the most unfavorable situation for effective leadership is when the leader is

disliked, has little power in his or her position and faces an unstructured task. Fiedler

subsequently reevaluated his leadership model and limited it to two situational variables that

impact leadership effectiveness: the quality of a leader’s relationship with his or her followers

and the structure and coordination of the task (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2000).

Path-goal theory. The Path-Goal theory has its origins in the Ohio State Studies. This

theory is called “path-goal” because it focuses on how a leader influences his or her followers’

perceptions of their work goals, their personal goals and their paths to attaining those goals.

Path-Goal theory holds that a leader’s behavior is motivating or satisfying to the extent that the

behavior increases the followers’ goal accomplishments and clarifies the path to these goals

(Hersey et al., 2000).

According to the Path-Goal theory, leaders do their best when they provide what is

missing in a given leadership situation. For example, if clarification is missing, the leader should

provide structure, and if intrinsic or extrinsic rewards are missing, the leader should provide

rewards. Similarly, if an employee is not meeting performance expectations in an ambiguous

job, then a directive from the leader spelling out or clarifying work methods, procedures and

objectives may lead to greater employee effort, increased satisfaction and improved job

performance. The Path-Goal theory presents an excellent example of the need to analyze a

situation before attempting a leadership intervention (Hersey et al., 2000).

Hersey and Blanchard situational theory. The Hersey and Blanchard Situational

theory focuses attention on the characteristics of followers in determining the correct leadership

behavior. This theory proposes that subordinates vary in readiness levels, and that people who

are low in task readiness, due to weak ability, inadequate training or insecurity, require a

different leadership style than do those whose levels of readiness are high and who possess

strong ability, skills, confidence and willingness to work (Daft, 2008).

The Situational theory assumes that leaders can adopt one of four leadership styles to

address their followers’ levels of readiness. The four styles, which are based on a combination

of a high or low degree of people orientation and a high or low degree of task orientation, are

telling, selling, participating and delegating. The telling style shows a high concern for tasks and

a low concern for people and relationships, and involves giving explicit directives about how

tasks should be carried out (Draft, 2008).

The selling style reflects a high concern for both tasks and people. This approach allows

the leader to explain decisions and gives subordinates a chance to ask questions to clarify and

understand their work tasks. The participating leadership style involves a combination of high

concern for followers and relationships and low concern for production tasks. With this style,

the leader shares ideas with subordinates, gives them a chance to participate and facilitates

decision making. The fourth style, the delegating style, shows a low concern for both

relationships and tasks. The leader who adopts this style provides little direction and support

because he or she turns over responsibility for decisions and their implementation to

subordinates (Draft, 2008).

Recent leadership theories. Several additional leadership theories have been postulated

in the organizational behavior literature in recent years. In important ways, these recent theories

have built upon and contributed to the earlier advances of trait, behavior and contingency

theories. Newer leadership theories treat leadership as a process of change and regard the leader

as a primary catalyst of change (Nohria & Khurana, 2010). According to Hallinger (2003), “over

the past two decades, debate over the most suitable leadership role for principals has been

dominated by two conceptual models: instructional leadership and transformational leadership”

(p. 329).

Instructional leadership model. The instructional leadership model emerged from

research on effective schools during the 1980s. With an emphasis on curriculum development

and supervision, the instructional leadership model led most international thinking in the 1980s

and early 1990s as the best approach to effectively leading schools and improving the learning

outcomes of students (Hallinger, 2003). Principals with instructional leadership styles exhibit

behaviors that affect classroom practice, including framing school goals, maintaining high

visibility, supervising and evaluating instruction, coordinating the curriculum and monitoring

student progress. The instructional leadership model was the model of choice at most principals’

leadership academies in the United States during the 1980s (Bush, 2003; Hallinger, 2003;

Ylimaki, 2007).

In short, the instructional leadership model emphasizes three construct, namely, defining

the school’s mission, managing the instructional program and promoting a positive school-

learning climate. The instructional leadership model shaped much of the thinking internationally

regarding effective principalship in the 1980s and early 1990s.

Transformation leadership model. The transformational leadership model originated in

the 1970s, but it found a receptive audience in the education community in the 1990s as part of a

general reaction against the instructional model. The instructional leadership model was

criticized as being too directive, too principal-centered and largely deaf to the voices of teachers

and parents as school leaders (Hallinger, 2003; Nguni, Sleegers, & Denessen, 2006).

In light of these criticisms, as schools in the United States were being restructured in the

1990s, scholars and practitioners began to popularize concepts such as shared leadership, teacher

leadership, distributed leadership and transformational leadership (Hallinger, 2003; Nguni,

Sleegers, & Denessen, 2006).

Transformational school leaders inspire and excite followers to high levels of

performance and empower their followers to achieve extraordinary results (Hallinger, 2003;

Nohria & Khurana, 2010; Ylimaki, 2007). The transformational principal is not expected to

provide the sole leadership that creates a robust and successful school environment. The

transformational principal emphasizes individual support, shared goals, vision, intellectual

stimulation, culture building, rewards, high expectation and modeling (Hallinger, 2003; Ylimaki,

2007). For the most part, however, the suitability or effectiveness of both instructional principals

and transformational principals has been linked to factors in the external environment and the

local context of their schools (Hallinger, 2003).

As a further distinction, instructional leadership has been described by some scholars as a

directive, top-down approach that emphasizes the principal’s coordination and control of

instruction, where as the transformational leadership, is often regarded as a type of shared or

distributed leadership in which principal focuses on stimulating change through bottom-up

participation (Ylimaki, 2007; Hallinger, 2003).

Expectations of the Principal

Rammer (2007) indicates that as a result of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB),

public school principals in the United States have come under increased pressure and have been

made more accountable for higher student achievement. The NCLB legislation increased testing

requirements, mandating annual assessments in reading and mathematics in grades 3 through 8

and in grade 10, and required schools to satisfy a defined set of adequate yearly progress (AYP)

requirements regarding student achievement. Failing schools face interventions that can include

severe sanctions (Dufour, Dufour, & Eaker, 2008). One of the consequences that a school may

face if it fails to meet NCLB student achievement standards is the removal of the school’s

principal (Rammer, 2007).

Habegger (2008) notes that the job description for a school principal cannot adequately

be captured in a 1,000-word essay, given that today’s principal is constantly multitasking and

must be able to shift roles at a moment’s notice. Today’s principals juggle with competing tasks

on a daily basis in an effort to satisfy demands from both internal and external stakeholders

(Catano & Stronge, 2007). A study in 2000 of a well-run 250-school district in England found

that 40% of the principals and deputy principals who had visited their doctors in the previous

year had stress-related problems, and 30% were taking medication. In a similar study, 90% of

the 137 principals and vice principals in Toronto, Canada reported increased demands on their

time, new programs and a large number of priorities and directives from their boards and the

Ministry of Education (Fullan, 2007).

In their research on evaluation of principals, Catano and Stronge (2007) found complex

and often competing standards of performance for principals in the United States. They note, for

example, that the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) develops annual

standards for school leaders, while the Virginia Standards of Accreditation establishes additional

state-level performance standards. Local school districts also prescribe evaluation instruments

for standardizing the work of principals.

The Role of the Principal

To understand the role of the principal as presented in the literature, several topics will be

discussed in relationship to expected role and responsibility of principals, including the role of

the principal regarding school culture, schools’ mission, instructional program, learning climate,

school management, and communication. The expectations and role of principals across nations

will also be reviewed.

School culture. To understand the role of the principal in creating a successful learning

environment, Habegger (2008) studied principals at three high-performing schools that are low

on the socio-economic scale, a characteristic shared by most urban and rural school districts in

the United States and in most parts of the world. The three principals played the important roles

of creating positive school cultures with each individual feeling a sense of comfort and

importance, aligning instruction to state academic content standards, ensuring continuous

improvements in their school buildings, designing instruction for student success and developing

partnerships with parents and the community. Overall, Habegger found that the three principals

created a culture that empowered and installed confidence in teachers, they solicited professional

dialogue and research, they valued their students and teachers and they involved students’

parents and community members in enhancing the effectiveness of their schools.

While all roles of a school principal are important, creating a positive school culture is

imperative because it is the underlying reason why other aspects of a successful school work

well (Engels, Hotton, Devos, Bouckenooghe, & Aelterman, 2008; Habegger, 2008). Fullan

(2007) argues that for schools to be effective, the best standards of practice and reform efforts

must be evident in even the daily organization and culture of schools.

School mission, instructional program and learning climate. Citing the work of

Hallinger and Murphy (1985), Dufour, Dufour, and Eaker (2008) describe a three-leadership-

dimensional role of the principal. The first role is to define the mission of the school. This

involves framing the goals of the school and effectively communicating them. The second role

is concerned with managing the instructional program. In this role, the principal supervises and

evaluates instruction, coordinates the curriculum and monitors student progress. The third role

of the principal is to promote a positive learning climate. This role promotes instructional time

and professional development, maintains high visibility, provides incentives for teachers,

enforces academic standards and provides incentives for students.

In another study that largely reflects the three-leadership-dimensional role of the

principal, Leithwood, Anderson, Louis, and Wahlstrom (2004) propose that the role of the

principal includes 1) setting directions, 2) developing people and 3) redesigning the organization.

Setting directions for the school accounts for the largest proportion of a principal’s impact; it

involves developing a shared vision, using goals to motivate people and helping them to make

sense of their work, monitoring organizational performance and promoting effective

communication. In his or her developmental role, the principal provides intellectual stimulation

and support that will enable teachers and others in the system to succeed. Redesigning the

organization entails creating and supporting a climate and culture that enhance collaboration,

teaching and learning.

Instruction management, internal relations, organization management,

administration and external relations. According to a study of the National Center for

Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (CALDER) titled Triangulating Principal

Effectiveness: How Perspectives of Parents, Teachers, and Assistant Principals Identify the

Central Importance of Managerial Skills, a principal performs the duties of instruction

management, internal relations, organization management, administration and external relations.

Instruction management includes tasks that the principal executes to promote, support and

improve the implementation of curricular programs in classrooms. Under internal relations, the

principal must be able to build strong interpersonal relationships within the school.

Organizational management involves the principal’s taking active and direct responsibility

throughout the year for satisfying the school’s medium- and long-term goals. The administrative

role of the principal focuses on routine administrative functions for compliance with state or

federal regulations. Under external relations, the principal must work with stakeholders in the

community (Bagin, Gallagher & Moore, 2008).

Interstate school leaders’ licensure consortium standards. In 1996 The Interstate

School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), a program of the Council of Chief State School

Officers, decreed a set of standards to be implemented by school leaders in order to ensure the

success of all students. The standards include developing a vision of shared learning and

supported by the school community, advocating, nurturing and sustaining a school culture and

instructional program conducive to student learning and professional growth, ensuring effective

and efficient management of the learning environment, responding to diverse community

interests and needs and mobilizing community resources, acting with integrity, fairness, and in

an ethical manner and understanding and responding to the larger political, social, economic and

cultural context (Dufour, Dufour, & Eaker, 2008).

Professional learning community. The idea of a Professional Learning Community

(PLC), a strategy for creating high-performance schools and ensuring greater student

achievement which was discussed mainly among educational researchers prior to 1998, has

gained enormous traction among educators in the United States (Dufour et al., 2008). A PLC is

a community of “educators committed to working collectively in ongoing processes of collective

inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they serve” (Dufour et al.,

2008, p. 14). A PLC has six major characteristics, and the principal plays a pivotal role in

creating and sustaining each of these: 1) a shared mission, vision and collective commitment; 2)

a collective culture focused on learning; 3) collective inquiry into best practice and current

reality; 4) an action-oriented attitude among educators; 5) a commitment to continuous

improvement; and 6) a results-oriented mindset.

Dufour et al. (2008) suggest three fundamental skills that principals should embrace and

that will help them create meaningful and manageable conceptual frameworks for addressing the

challenges of their responsibilities. These skills are: 1) being clear about his or her primary

responsibility; 2) dispersing leadership throughout the school; and 3) bringing coherence to the

difficulties of schooling through the alignment of the structure and culture of the school with its

core purpose.

In a review of the book School Leadership that Works: From Research to Results written

by Marzano, Waters, and McNulty, Uitto (2006) notes that some of a principal’s duties that are

relevant to the principal’s leadership are: 1) being an agent of change who challenges current

practices; 2) having knowledge of curriculum, instruction and assessment in order to provide

hands-on support to teachers; 3) inspiring others to innovate and to be aware of current

educational theories and practices and monitoring and evaluating to provide feedback on the

effectiveness of curricular, instructional and assessment practices; 4) adapting leadership style to

current situations; and 5) sharing beliefs about school teaching and learning and modeling

behaviors that mirror those beliefs.

Principalship in developing nations. There is obviously a huge contextual variation in

the roles of, constraints on and realities facing principals in developing nations. Although there

is no single profile of school principalship in developing countries, studies have uncovered some

common characteristics, including limited autonomy, autocratic leadership style, summative

evaluation, low degree of change initiation and lack of instructional leadership (Oplatka, 2004).

Despite recent trends toward decentralization in some countries, the Ministry of

Education in many developing countries remains responsible for a host of educational decisions,

policies and programs, such as the design of a unified national curriculum, syllabus and

examinations, regulations concerning materials and guides and funding and staffing decisions,

including the recruitment and selection of educators and staff development. Such a highly

centralized system tends to limit the role of the principal to a primarily administrative function,

lacking a need for innovative and proactive management and inclining the principal to employ an

autocratic rather than participative leadership style (Oplatka, 2004).

Oplatka (2004) points out that principals in developing countries, particularly in Africa,

are preoccupied with satisfying basic needs and functions that most principals in Western nations

have probably never thought to include in their role definition. Oplatka notes that in Ghana, for

example, a principal may physically mend a leaking roof or a broken water pipe in the school

building. In some developing countries, including Kenya, South Africa, Botswana and Ghana,

the principal engages in fund raising to provide needed support for the school, because

continuing economic crises constrain the government from providing adequate funding for

education. While a major role of the principal in Western societies during the 1990s was that of

an innovator who initiates school change, “the place given to change initiation and

implementation in [some] developing countries and the effects of principals on the process of

school improvement are relatively minor” (Oplatka, 2004, p. 436).

Attributes and Competencies of the Principal

In a study of the demands placed on the contemporary principal, Botha (2004) proposes

that effective school principals should possess the following key qualities: reflectiveness, vision,

commitment and courage and power and the ability to empower. Reflectiveness involves

reminiscent thinking or focused review in which the principal seeks to identify causes and

effects, learn new methods and apply what has been learned. Vision involves charting the course

of where the school might be going or what it wants to achieve. With respect to commitment

and courage, a principal should be willing to stand up for the things that are genuinely important

in education. A principal’s power and ability to empower should be used to create an

environment where people feel that they are valued and a part of the action and know that their

input counts.

Another study, which was conducted at six highly impoverished but nevertheless

successful schools in South Africa, suggests that compassion, commitment and support are

qualities that effective principals would need for attaining higher school performance and student

achievement. Compassion includes identification with the poor’s struggle to survive, respect for

human dignity and personal interest in the school’s individual students, teachers and parents.

Compassion enables a principal to see each member of the educational community as a person

and not a mere number (Kamper, 2008).

A principal embodies commitment through self-discipline, punctuality, neat appearance,

energy, visibility, optimism, bravery and resilience and involvement in teaching some classes. A

principal’s support includes facilitating teaching and learning, identifying and acquiring

resources for the school, meticulously and individually monitoring student progress, taking

immediate action to correct problems and ensuring that teachers are equipped for their tasks

(Kamper, 2008).

Through extensive research on leadership, Kouzes and Posner (2007) have identified five

practices that they call “personal-best” practices (p. 14). The practices are to 1) model the way,

2) inspire a shared vision, 3) challenge the process, 4) enable others to act and 5) encourage the

heart. These practices are arguably applicable to principal leadership. Concerning the first

practice, exemplary leaders model the way because they know that if they want to encourage

commitment and achieve the highest standards, it is essential that they model the behavior they

expect of others. A leader’s words must match his or her deeds. Regarding the second practice,

in which an effective leader inspires a shared vision, believes strongly in a dream and enlists

others in the common vision, the leader needs to have intimate knowledge of others’ dreams,

hopes, aspirations, visions and values (Kouzes and Posner, 2007).

The third personal-best practice of an effective leader propels him or her to challenge the

process or the status quo. The leader must be willing to step into the unknown to find

opportunities for innovating, growing and improving, because the leader is aware that innovation

and change involve experimentation and risk-taking. Enabling followers to act, the fourth

practice of an effective leader, involves taking actions aimed at common goals: team building,

collaboration, trust building, capacity building, and leadership and decision-making sharing.

Finally, exemplary leaders encourage the hearts of their followers by motivating and inspiring

them when they are exhausted, frustrated or disenchanted (Kouzes and Posner, 2007).

Bennis and Goldsmith (2003) propose ambition, competence and integrity as qualities of

exemplary leaders. They refer to the three qualities as “the three-legged stool on which true

leadership sits” (p. 2), arguing that ambition is counterbalanced by competence and integrity and

that this equation must remain in balance if the leader is to remain a constructive influence. An

imbalance in this triad, coupled with “a formidable combination of ambition and competence”,

can “create or support a self-serving leader who places personal power above vision, self-interest

before the good of the whole” (p. 2).

Leadership Development through Competency Models

Competencies are defined as the knowledge, skills, abilities and behavior that are

necessary for effective job performance and achievement of organizational results (Mansfield,

1996; Mestry & Grobler, 2003). Chung-Herrera, Enz, and Lankau (2003) state: “Designed to

help an organization meet its strategic objectives through building human-resource capability,

competency modeling has been in existence since the 1970s” (pp. 17-18). David McClelland

created the first competency models in 1970s. They gained popularity in the late 1980s and

remain in use today. Most competency models cast leadership traits and characteristics in terms

of behavior because behavior is their observable manifestation (Chung-Herrera et al., 2003).

Competencies are essential for inclusion in a model when they distinguish superior

performers from poor performers. Competencies are the underlying factors that enable managers

to perform their jobs better in more situations, more often and with better results and are

therefore considered to be the factors that differentiate the best from the rest (Chung-Herrera et

al., 2003; Mestry & Grobler, 2003).

Mestry and Grobler (2003), for example, match the following tasks with the

corresponding principal competencies: managing people (task) is matched with sensitivity,

motivating and evaluating (competencies); planning examinations (task) is matched with

analyzing, directional leadership and coordinating (competencies); and managing the political

environment (task) is matched with political ability, persuading and negotiating (competencies).

A well-developed competency model can be used to guide or enhance human resource

recruitment and selection activities, training and development, performance appraisal, coaching,

counseling and mentoring, reward systems, career development, succession planning and change

management (Chung-Herrera et al., 2003; Markus, Cooper-Thomas, & Allpress, 2005).

Developing a Competency Model

Zwell (2000) suggests that there is no one correct way to construct competency models.

He notes that the process can be a relatively simple undertaking or it can take years and cost

millions of dollars. He adds that the way in which a competency model is developed depends on

the nature of the organization and the following considerations: 1) the practices or purpose of the

model; 2) the financial and human resources available; 3) persons to be included in the process

of developing and endorsing the applications; and 4) who is to be included in the implementation

process.

The development of a competency model can involve researching the competencies

possessed by successful and/or exceptional practitioners who achieve organizational goals. It

might be politically expedient to involve a prestigious consulting firm in the competency

modeling process in order to establish credibility with a critical constituency. Sometimes the

best approach is to use the least expensive process for competency modeling because of resource

constraints (Sinnott, Madison & Pataki, 2002; Zwell, 2000).

Some New York State agencies use the following approach to develop competency

models: 1) identify the purpose of the competency model; 2) develop a list of potential

competencies from a menu of competencies drawn from private and/or public sources; 3)

determine which competencies apply to your purpose through the use of focus groups, surveys or

interviews; and 4) decide whether you will engage a consultant or do the modeling on your own

(Sinnott et al., 2002).

No matter which method is used for developing a competency model, the effectiveness of

the model depends on how well the competencies are measured. The most common measuring

approach is the school grading system, where 5 means outstanding, 4 means exceeds

expectations, 3 means meets expectations, 2 means below expectations and 1 means far below

expectations. Another method of measurement uses the behaviorally anchored rating scales, in

which each rated level is defined by specific and observable behaviors. Yet another approach to

competency measurement is to define levels of proficiency in competencies in terms of a set of

behaviors expected for each grade or rank level (Zwell, 2000).

Leadership Development of Principals

Societal pressures resulting from technology, demographic shifts, redefinitions of the

family, testing and accountability requirements, decentralization and site-based management,

rapid economic changes, violence and various public policy mandates have combined to create a

web of conflicting demands and expectations for school principals. Principals are expected to

build team relationships among staff members, acquire and allocate resources, promote teacher

development, improve the performance of students on standardized tests and build effective

relations with the relevant stakeholders. To succeed in these tasks, principals need to undergo

continuous professional development (Fenwick & Pierce, 2002).

Guskey and Huberman (1995) claim that never before in education has there been a

greater recognition of the need for ongoing professional development programs to ensure school

improvement. Despite this recognition and the link that has been demonstrated between quality

leadership and the overall effectiveness of schools and districts, surprisingly little attention has

been paid to the professional development of principals (Bloom, Castagna, & Warren, 2003;

Daresh & Playko, 1992; Mann, 1998). The Policy Forum on Education Leadership reports that

only 25% of today’s principals are prepared to be effective instructional leaders (Barnett, 2004).

Hale and Moorman (2003) point out that leadership preparation programs are not

providing the needed training for public school principals. Mathibe (2007) suggests that

principals should be exposed to professional development programs in order to “ensure that

schools are managed and led by appropriately qualified principals” (p. 523). Referring to

professional development as oxygen for principals, Mathibe argues that the goal of quality in

education requires principals to be up-to-date with developments in their fields.

In a study of the leadership proficiencies of principals in Ghana, the study by Hope,

Respress, and Zame (2008) found that heads of public schools in Ghana lacked adequate

leadership qualifications, a situation they attributed to the absence of school leadership

preparation programs. Zame et al. (2008) recommend that Ghana education authorities ensure

that public school principals undergo adequate professional development to enhance their

knowledge, skills and dispositions for effective principalship.

A similar study by Onguko, Abdalla and Webber (2008) reports that educational

institutions in Kenya and Tanzania lacked the capabilities to prepare new principals or to offer

ongoing professional development support. Principals tend to be promoted without specific

preparation, receive little or no induction, have limited access to suitable in-service training and

enjoy little support from the educational bureaucracy. Given the significant leadership role of

principals, Onguko et al. recommend that educational policy makers should establish more

institutions that can properly prepare principals and provide them with ongoing professional

development support.

Meaning of Professional Development

Professional development is an elusive term and means different things to different

people. Some people use the term to refer to in-service training and workshops, while others

understand it as a process in which educators work under supervision to gain tenure or to

enhance their professional practice. Yet others define professional development as an ongoing

learning process in which educators engage voluntarily to learn how best to adjust their teaching

to the learning needs of their students (Diaz-Maggioli, 2003).

In addition, the term professional development has been applied to enrollment in formal

courses and programs in professional education and to the formal and informal development of

professional skills that occur in the workplace. Formal professional education courses and

programs may be designed for inexperienced people seeking entry into a particular profession or

for experienced professionals who desire some form of continuing education outside their usual

place of work (Dall’Alba & Sandberg, 2006).

Professional development in the workplace may be organized through structured

activities or as courses aimed at enhancing professional skills, keeping a group of professionals

up-to-date and/or supporting organizational change. When professional development occurs

informally, it tends to form part of the day-to-day work of the professionals concerned—a kind

of on-the-job learning (Dall’Alba & Sandberg, 2006).

Harper (2008) agrees that professional development applies to professional experiences

that include learning opportunities found in collegial conversations, coaching episodes, shared

decision-making groups, reflective journals, parent forums and the like. Fullan (2007) suggests

that a profession is not created by certificates and licensures, but rather by the existence of a

substantive professional knowledge base and by the genuine desire of the profession’s members

to improve that knowledge base and their practice through professional development and related.

This is consistent with Collins’s (1998) conception that professional development is

about change, a change in what you know and believe about teaching and learning and you can

do to improve classroom and school performance.

Generally, professional development is not, and should not be seen as, a one-shot, one-

size-fits-all event (Diaz-Maggioli, 2003). Rather, Diaz-Maggioli suggests, professional

development is an evolving process of professional self-disclosure, reflection and growth that

yields the best results with respect to job-embedded responsibilities and that is sustained over

time.

Professional Development Models

Three major philosophical perspectives have greatly influenced professional development

and educational leadership in the United States since the end of civil war, up to around 1920,

when the nation witnessed a tremendous growth in formal educational system. Individual schools

became larger and more complex, and the role of the principal was born in many school districts,

as it was recognized that the management of a school was more difficult and time-consuming

than previously thought (Daresh & Playko, 1992; Draft, 2010).

The scientific approach to administration influenced school leadership and pedagogies in

the early 1900. Proponents of this school of thought such as Frederick Taylor focused largely on

improving organizational efficiency. The scientific approach to school leadership assumes that

certain aspects of organizational life were so predictable that specific laws could be made to

guide behavior in almost every circumstance, and that education outcomes are also highly

predictable (Daresh & Playko, 1992; Draft, 2010).

The scientific orientation strongly suggests that there is a single right way of doing things

in education, and once that path is identified, it is the responsibility of the principal to pursue it.

Professional development under the scientific perspective involves a great deal of one-way

communication from those who possess the scientific facts of how to run schools to the

principals (Daresh & Playko, 1992).

Spark and Hirsh (1997) hope that “soon to be gone forever…are the days when

educators…sit relatively passively while an ‘expert’ exposes them to new ideas or ‘trains’ them

in new practices” and that the “success of the effort is judged by a ‘happiness quotient’ that

measures participants’ satisfaction with the experience and the off-the-cuff assessment regarding

its usefulness” (p. 1).

From approximately 1920 to 1960, the human relations movement emerged as reaction to

the scientific approach to school administration. While the emphasis of the scientific approach

was on organizational efficiency and interests, the human relations perspective placed premium

on developing school personnel and satisfying their personal interests. The human relations

approach assumes that addressing the professional and personal needs of school personnel, and

the improvement of the psychosocial climate of the school, as opposed to only focusing on

organizational interests and outcomes, produce happy and productive workers, and better

promote educational outcomes. Professional development programs under the human relations

perspective would focus on promoting group process and individual skills in dealing with people

issues, and the psychological health and welfare of school principals ((Daresh & Playko, 1992;

Draft, 2010).

Human Resource Development is the third educational professional development

perspective, which represents the predominant perspective on organizations today. The basic

assumption of this perspective is that the most important activity of an administrator is to assist

school personnel become as skillful and effective as possible. This assumption holds further that

the most important concern of the school leader is the improvement of organizational

effectiveness, and that happy employees are productive employees if they work in a productive

place (Daresh & Playko, 1992; Draft, 2010).

The human resource development perspective influences professional development by its

emphasis on helping future education leaders to develop a personalized vision of organizational

effectiveness, learn how to work effectively with staff in developing a shared vision of school

effectiveness and productivity, and create opportunities for experienced school leaders to

enhance skills needed to communicate with staff, or involve teachers and others more

productively in decision making relative to management and goals (Daresh & Playko, 1992;

Draft, 2010).

Daresh & Playko (1992) suggest that individuals representing the scientific, human

relations and human resource perspectives are in “leadership positions in schools” today and

caution that “professional development available to people who espouse these various

perspectives need to be designed so that leaders can be prepared effectively for future

positions…and given ongoing support…to serve the needs of students” (pp. 11-12).

Fenwick and Pierce (2002) have also described three models of professional development

for principals. Their first model is called the traditional model, which is essentially reflective of

Daresh and Playko’s (1992) scientific approach to management. The traditional model of

professional development acquaints principals with the research base on management and

behavioral sciences. This exposure is usually done in the form of a university program, in-service

academy, workshop or seminar setting, where the learning activities are institutionally defined,

and generally not tailored toward the specific learning needs of the principal or his/her specific

school context. The principal becomes a passive recipient of knowledge in the traditional

professional development setting (Fenwick and Pierce, 2002).

In their criticism of workshops, which are an integral part of the traditional professional

development approach articulated by Daresh & Playko (1992) and Fenwick and Pierce (2002).

Evans and Mohr (1999) point out that participants often remember the workshops as stimulating

and productive and assured that their effectiveness will improve almost immediately as a

consequent of their attendance. However, the workshop experience, too often, seems to fade

surprisingly quickly. Evans and Mohr argue that teaching principals school leadership by giving

them predigested training hardly leads to new thinking about leadership, teaching or learning.

Fenwick and Pierce’s (2002) second professional development model is the craft model.

This model regards the principal as a recipient of knowledge from experienced administrators,

whom he or she shadows in internship and field experiences. The objective of the shadowing is

for the principal-observer to observe how another principal interacts with school personnel and

the public, and handles issues and crises. In the craft model, the basis of knowledge is the

practical wisdom of experienced practitioners and the learning context is a real school setting.

The third model is reflective inquiry approach, which encourages principals to generate

knowledge through a process of systematic inquiry. Principals are active participants in their

learning processes, and the source of knowledge is in self-reflection and engagement (Fenwick

and Pierce, 2002). Widely recognized a pioneer in the articulation of the concept of reflective

practice in the 1909 and 1933, John Dewey views reflective thinking as active, persistent and

careful evaluation of any belief or supposed form of knowledge, and that learning improves

when it arises out of the process of reflection. Dewey believes that a moral person would treat

professional actions as experimental and reflect on the actions and their consequences (Clift,

Houston, & Pugach, 1990; Dillon, 2007).

Donald Schon, a leading proponent of reflective practice whose Reflective Practitioner

struck the consciousness of educators in 1983 and 1986, argues that society has placed heavy

emphasis on technical knowledge, which has led to the undervaluing of the practical knowledge

of knowing-in-action that is critical to the work of practitioners. Reflective practice allows

practitioners to periodically step back to ponder their own actions and those of others. It helps

educators to continually explore and question their assumptions and beliefs in order to improve

their practice (Huge, 1989; Shannon & Bylsma, 2007; Ferraro, 2000; Barnett & Mahony, 2006).

Mentoring, networking, reflective reading and journaling are crucial professional

development approaches that fall under the reflective practice model (Fenwick and Pierce, 2002).

Mentoring is an arrangement in which a professional colleague and critical friend helps the

principal to understand the professional norms and job expectations, and provide advice about

challenges and career growth. Mentors are traditionally regarded as individuals with advanced

experience, knowledge, wisdom, skills and influence who provide support to and promote the

career development of their protégés through a collaborative relationship (D’Abate & Eddy,

2008).

Over half of the United States’ states require that all beginning principals receive at least

one year of mentor support when they assume the principalship (Daresh, 2002), as cited in

Fenwick and Pierce, 2002). Bloom, Castagna and Warren (2003), however, argue that the

mentoring that most principals receive is problematic because the mentors usually come from the

same districts as the beginning principals, which make it difficult to share confidences.

Networking links principals for the purpose of sharing concerns and effective practices

on an ongoing basis. This professional development strategy is based on the belief that collegial

support is critical to effective leadership. Networking tends to be informal arrangements in which

principals seek out colleagues who share similar concerns and potential solutions to problems.

True networking, rather than being periodic social gatherings, involves regular engagements and

planned activities by principals aimed at enhancing collective professional development

(Fenwick and Pierce, 2002).

While mentors are typically senior organizational insiders in job-alike positions, most

effective coaches are generally outsiders, who have leadership coaching as their primary work.

Reading and journaling go hand in hand as fundamental practices in reflective practice.

Principals read professional literature, as well as novels, plays and poetry. The assumption

underpinning this practice is that reading enlightens principals about the human condition,

leadership, teaching and learning (Fenwick and Pierce, 2002).

Additionally, principals are encouraged to engage on reflection through journaling, which

is the recording of personal reflections about professional challenges, successes and failures.

Principals can share their journal reflections and obtain feedback from colleagues and mentors or

coaches, thereby encouraging further reflection that shape future action plan (Fenwick and

Pierce, 2002).

Macione (2009) and Zimmerman and May (2003) indicate that effective professional

development involves learners in genuine experiences, builds upon a sustained and collaborative

strategy, adapts to the needs of each learners, and incorporates school-based, job-embedded

experiences.

Several factors tend to inhabit the professional development of principals. The factors

include time constraint, principals’ dissatisfaction with the utility of in-service and university

course work, principals’ perception that it’s unethical to use public funds for their learning,

principals’ thinking that publicly engaging in learning they reveal themselves as flawed, and the

tendency of the moral order of schools to place principals in authority as knowers, and not

learners (Barth, 2006; Barth, 2007).

In a study of factors affecting the professional development of Ohio principals, the

overwhelming majority of 237 principals responded that the two most dominant inhibitors to

professional development were the lack of money and time (Zimmerman & May, 2003).

Leadership Development and Cultural Context

Interest in the development of education leadership is global. Professional development

programs for school leadership are implemented in various ways, often depending on cultural

differences. For this reason, it would be ill-advised to conceive of professional development

programs as having uniform content and methodology across the world (Athanasoula-Reppa &

Lazaridou, 2008; Walker & Dimmock, 2006).

Cowie and Crawford (2007) concur with this point, writing that while there is consensus

about the important roles of principals and the need for their professional development, there are

often considerable philosophical and political disagreements about the set of skills that effective

principals require and about the quality, evaluation and requirements of professional leadership

development programs.

Despite the differences across countries regarding professional development programs, an

international 15-country comparative study of professional development for school leaders found

that most effective programs had centralized guidelines for quality assurance but decentralized

implementation to allow for greater flexibility and contextualization (Walker & Dimmock,

2006). Effective programs focused on long-term development and not just on-the-job training.

Such programs actively involve participants and stress the critical role of collaboration.

Effective professional development programs for principals also tend to emphasize the

importance of relating learning opportunities to school context and finding a balance between

theory and practice (Walker & Dimmock, 2006).

A similar report of best professional development practices in 12 nations in Asia, Europe

and North America highlights themes such as shifting from passive to active learning, creating

opportunities that connect training to practice, developing appropriate mechanisms for

performance standards and evaluation, implementing effective transitions into the leadership role

and validating indigenous knowledge and other contextual variables (Walker & Dimmock,

2006).

Chapter III: Methodology

Research Question

This study was aimed at understanding the needs of Liberian public school principals

with respect to professional development opportunities available to them. The research question

that guided the study is as follows: “What are Liberian public school principals’ perceived

leadership development needs in post-conflict Liberia?”

Research Design

A qualitative research design was deemed suitable for providing the data necessary for

answering the study’s research question. The study used a variety of qualitative techniques to

collect, organize and analyze the data. A major advantage of using a qualitative research design

is that data is collected in face-to-face interactions with selected persons in their professional

settings, allowing the researcher to understand a social phenomenon from the perspectives of the

participants (Gay, 1996; Krathwohl, 1993; McMillan & Schumacher, 2006).

There is another reason why a qualitative method of inquiry was appropriate for this

study: no prior research has documented the perceptions of Liberian public school principals

concerning their leadership development needs. As Patten (2005) puts it, “when little is known

about a topic, qualitative research should usually be initially favored” (p. 21). It is important to

add that qualitative designs are just as systematic as quantitative designs (McMillan &

Schumacher, 2006). This chapter includes the following topics: context of the study, research

question, selection of participants, data collection and analysis, validity and credibility issues,

protection of participants, researcher role and limitations of the study.

Study Context

I conducted the study in Liberia in May, 2011. This confirms Creswell’s (2009)

observation that qualitative researchers tend to collect data in the field where participants

experience the issue under study. The study was carried out in Montserrado County, where

Liberia’s capital Monrovia is located. Montserrado County was selected primarily because it is

currently the most diversely populated county in Liberia; it’s like a microcosm of Liberia.

In addition, the country’s development efforts have been heavily concentrated in

Montserrado County over the years. This has disproportionately benefited Montserrado County

in terms of social developments, including support for and opportunities in public education. The

Ministry of Education, the department which oversees all public education in Liberia, is located

in Montserrado County, in Monrovia. Of the 15 counties that constitute Liberia, Montserrado

County has the third largest number of public primary schools, the second largest number of

junior (middle high) schools and the largest number of senior (secondary high) schools (Liberian

Ministry of Education, 2008). A final reason for the choice of Montserrado County was the

researcher’s security concerns. Relatively, security and safety remain a concern in other counties

of rural Liberia.

Although the county of Montserrado was chosen as the site for the study, 10 of the 12

principals came from the Monrovia-based Monrovia Consolidated School System (MCSS). The

other two principals came from outside of the MCSS system, which is a semi-autonomous public

organization of nearly 30 public schools with limited connection to the central Ministry of

Education. It was established in the 1960s through the collaboration of the United States Aid for

International Development (USAID) and the Government of Liberia to improve education in

Liberia’s capital Monrovia (“Monrovia Consolidated School Project,” 1970).

A recent national education conference on decentralization in Liberia described the

MCSS system as a useful organizational education framework and proposed the MCSS model as

an “honored program within an otherwise exhausting legacy of failed innovations and

interventions [in education systems in Liberia]” (Liberia National Education Policies 2011, p. 4).

I believe that if the leadership development needs of principals of the supposedly

organizationally successful MCSS system were found to be wanting, then public school

principals in rural Montserrado County or other parts of Liberia would likely be in greater need

of professional development opportunities.

Participants

A purposive sampling method was used to select the 12 public school principals who

made up the sample for the study. Qualitative researchers generally use purposive sampling,

which is the process of deliberately selecting participants who can provide pertinent information

about the specific topic or setting under investigation (Creswell, 2009; Gay & Airasian, 2000;

Patten, 2005; Seidman, 1998). The study participants were chosen based on their experience as

currently practicing principals who could provide information relevant to the research question.

Against this background, two principals were not selected from the recruited pool of 16 potential

participants because they had newly become acting principals. Two other principals declined to

participate.

The 12 principals who were finally selected included 6 primary school principals (from

kindergarten to grade nine) and 6 secondary school principals (grade nine to grade twelve). The

sample also included 10 male principals and 2 female principals. This gender imbalance reflected

the fact that there are fewer female than male public school principals in Montserrado County

and in Liberia as a whole.

Data Collection

The steps involved in collecting qualitative data include setting the study’s boundaries,

collecting information through unstructured or semi-structured observations and interviews,

documents and visual material, and establishing the protocol for recording information

(Creswell, 2009). As its data collection tools, the present study employed in-depth, semi-

structured interviews (Appendices C & D) along with a review of select documents.

Interviews. In-depth, semi-structured personal interviews provide flexibility that gives

the interviewer the opportunity to observe the subject and the conditions in which he or she is

responding, and questions can be repeated or explained in case they are not understood by the

respondents (Ary, Jacobs & Razavieh, 2002). Moreover, the personal contact increases the

likelihood that individuals will participate in the study and provide the desired information (Ary,

Jacobs & Razavieh, 2002).

Review of documents. Another data source for the study was a review of a select

number of policy and program documents of the Ministry of Education and international donor

organizations, which included USAID, UNICEF, UNESCO, International Institute for Education

Planning (IIEP), UNDP, International Rescue Committee (IRC) and the World Bank. Documents

are an important data source in many areas of investigations, and document analysis is widely

used in education research. One of the purposes of document analysis is to describe prevailing

practices and conditions, or ascertain the relative importance of, or interest in certain topics or

problems (Ary, Jacobs & Razavieh, 2002; Best & Kahn, 1993).

The review and coding of the document review were, as in the case of the interview data

analysis, carefully done. The document review focused mainly on discovering the “prevailing

practices and conditions” (Best & Kahn, 1993, p. 192) with respect to the extent to which the

professional development needs of public school principals have been prioritized and/or met in

the aftermath of the civil war in Liberia.

Challenges. The data collection process suffered a brief setback in early May, 2011,

after my arrival in Liberia. On the first day I met with the appropriate authority at the MCSS

office in Monrovia and explained the purpose of my research. The authority listened with keen

interest. He responded that the study was an important endeavor and he gave me his approval

and his business card. I immediately began to visit the public schools to establish personal

contact with principals who might participate in the study (Seidman, 1998), and a number of

principals agreed to being included in the pool of potential participants.

On the second day, the principals that I visited were unwilling to talk to me, and some of

them who had previously agreed to participate in the study backed out. The principals said that

the MCSS authority that gave me the approval had told them at a principals’ meeting that “some

kind of man” from the United States was gathering information because he was interested in the

position of “superintendent” of the MCSS. The principals indicated that they were advised not to

give me any information until they received further notice.

I contacted the Ministry of Education, which has overall responsibility for education in

the country. An assistant minister of the Ministry called up the MCSS authority. The MCSS

authority was advised to cooperate with me as my research was purely academic and that I had

no mischievous agenda toward the MCSS or its authorities. This intervention subsequently

resolved the issue, and the same MCSS authority gave his approval again. But this time, it was

not verbal; he wrote it on the back of his business card: “Principals, please cooperate with Mr.

Norman and give him information he needs to do his research.”

I took the written permission with me as I continued to visit principals in Montserrado

County in order to develop a pool of potential participants from which the sample of 12

principals would be drawn. Before each interview began, I introduced myself appropriately and

reviewed the purpose of my research, the potential utility of the study’s result, the nature of the

interview and the relevant contact information (Appendix B). At the onset of each interview, the

rights, expectations and responsibilities of the principal and the ethical standards and conduct

required of the researcher were also disclosed.

I reviewed the interview protocol with the principals before the start of the interviews.

The first two principals preferred that the interviews not be audio-recorded as I had originally

planned. They said that in Liberia’s current politically charged climate and difficult economic

conditions, they would be comfortable speaking their minds only if the interviews went

unrecorded. I informed my advisor and the Institutional Review Board about this development.

The interviews with the first two principals were therefore not recorded. The subsequent

interviews were also not recorded to ensure consistency, gain cooperation and potentially relax

the participating principals.

For similar reasons, a few interview questions that reflected the critical incident approach

to obtaining answers from interviewees were modified. For example, questions that asked

principals to give instances of how they made particular decisions or handled particular incidents

were modified to ask principals about their decision making approaches or procedures without

pressing the principals to give specific decision making incidents that they have dealt with.

Given the economics and politics of the Liberian educational system and the earlier

misinformation about my motives as a researcher, the critical incident questions could have

created the impression that the principals were being investigated in some way. Nevertheless, the

modified questions that were presented to the principals were adequate for answering the

research question.

The interviews were conducted at the respective principals’ schools. Light, Singer, and

Willett (1990) suggest that when there are limited choices for site selection, a researcher should

consider purposeful selection rather than rely on the idiosyncrasies of chance. However, I

negotiated the interview site with each principal because, as Grinnell and Unrau (2008) suggest,

the selection of the interview location may be determined by what is available or where the

interviewee is willing to be interviewed.

Each interview lasted for more than an hour. The shortest interview and the longest

interview lasted 70 minutes and 90 minutes, respectively. Each interview lasted until the

principal apparently reached saturation level in sharing his or her experiences. Because the

interviews were not audio-recorded, I asked each principal to kindly speak at a reasonable pace

and to accept as many clarifying questions as possible to facilitate my accurate and detailed note-

taking. After each interview, a short questionnaire seeking demographic information from the 12

principals was administered (Appendix E).

Data Analysis

A problem that practically all qualitative researchers face is a lack of agreed-upon

approaches for analyzing qualitative data (Gay & Airasian, 2003; Best & Kahn, 2003). Ary,

Jacobs and Razavieh (2002) indicate that the major challenge for qualitative researchers is to

systematically search and organize the data to increase their understanding of the data and enable

them to present to others what they have learned. For this reason, the present study used thematic

analysis—a qualitative analytical method that focuses on describing and interpreting

participants’ views (Seidman, 1998).

The first step in any qualitative data analysis is to organize the data (Ary, Jacobs &

Razavieh, 2002; Best & Kahn, 1993). In the present study this began with reviewing the

interview notes for familiarization and completeness. The data was re-read several times after all

of the interviews were complete. In accordance with a suggestion of Seidman (1998), passages of

interest for the focus of the research were marked with a pencil. The marked passages were

classified into categories that represent similar ideas, words, phrase, sentences, or thoughts, as

described in Gay and Airasian (2000).

The constant comparison method was used to achieve the classification. This method

involves the repeated comparison of identified topics, ideas and concepts for the purpose of

determining the distinctive characteristics that will sort them into appropriate categories to be

used for the analysis of the interview data. (Gay & Airasian, 2000; Grinnell & Unrau, 2008).

As mentioned earlier, a select number of Government of Liberia and donor agencies

policy and program documents were carefully reviewed to get an insight into prevailing practices

and conditions (Best & Kahn, 1993) that characterize the professional leadership development

needs of public school principals in post-conflict Liberia.

Validity and Credibility

Validity and credibility threats were monitored throughout the research process. Validity

and credibility threats concern how the researcher might go wrong (Maxwell, 2005). Given that

validity is one of the criteria that determines the accuracy of a qualitative research study

(Creswell, 2009), three strategies were employed to rule out what Maxwell (2005) describes as

“specific plausible alternatives and threats to your interpretations and explanations” (p. 107).

One of the strategies used to ensure data accuracy was triangulation. In triangulation,

several data collection techniques or multiple data sources are used for cross-checking

information (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006). The data from the personal interviews was cross-

checked with the relevant policy and program documents from the Liberian Ministry of

Education and some key international donor organizations.

The second strategy used for ensuring data validity and credibility was the solicitation of

participant feedback or member checking. Member checking is the process of sharing the

researcher’s interpretation and conclusion with the actual participants for verification and

insights (Johnson, 1979). The findings and interpretation for this study were mailed to 6

principals who either did not have e-mail accounts or did not have computer access. Four of the

principals received their material via e-mail. The remaining two principals could not be reached

by phone to decide on the means by which they would get the material to member check my

findings, interpretation and conclusion. Most of the principals interviewed did not have internet

access (only one of the 12 schools that I visited had electricity at that time; electricity is

generally rationed in Monrovia).

The 10 principals who member checked the findings and interpretation--either through e-

mails or during telephone conversations—agreed with the analysis, interpretation and

conclusion. Two of the principals advised that I removed a particular phrase which had appeared

three times in my draft write up. They reasoned, and rightly so, that the use of this phrase could

reveal the identities of some principals that participated in the study. During the personal

interviews, I gathered that the phrase had been used to describe these principals because of their

ongoing criticism of the MCSS.

The third strategy used to ensure data accuracy was reflection on or articulation of the

researcher’s bias. Research bias is the tendency for researchers to select data that fit into their

existing theory or preconceptions (Maxwell, 2005). Maxwell argues that it is impossible to

completely eliminate the researcher’s beliefs, theories and perceptual lens. However, he urges

qualitative researchers to be well aware of their assumptions and roles in order to avoid

interjecting personal bias into the study. I deeply reflected on my feelings about and experiences

of public education in Liberia and wrote them in a memorandum (Appendix H). This is further

discussed below, under the heading Research Reflexivity. Additionally, my advisors and the

Northeastern University Institutional Review Board reviewed, questioned and checked my work

to ensure that the relevant research requirements and standards were satisfied.

Protection of Human Subjects

The study was meticulously guided by the relevant legal and ethical considerations of

Northeastern University internal Institutional Review Board (IRB). In collaboration with the

IRB, I prepared an unsigned informed consent form which was used to obtain the informed

consent of the participating principals. This was necessary to ensure what Best and Kahn (1993)

describe as a “complete understanding of the procedures employed, the risks involved, and the

demands that may be made upon participants” (p. 45).

I also cleared with the IRB a letter of introduction (Appendix A) that explained the

purpose of the research to the principals and that solicited their voluntary participation in the

study. The letter also addressed issues related to the rights and responsibilities of the principals

along with the ethical and professional responsibilities of the researcher. Having met the IRB

research requirements, the IRB issued an approval for the study to be conducted (Appendices F

& G).

As Crowl (1993) notes, anonymity and confidentiality are very important issues, and

researchers must assure participants that all information obtained during the course of the study

will be held in strict confidentiality. The use of codes has kept the identities of the principals

anonymous. Before the start of each interview, I emphasized the issues of anonymity and

confidentiality along with the other considerations contained in the informed consent form and

the introductory letter.

Researcher Reflexivity

The role of the researcher in a qualitative study is a major concern with respect to the

study’s validity. This concern is based on the fact that in a qualitative research, “the researcher is

the instrument of the research” (Maxwell, 2005, pp. 37-38). As the instrument, the qualitative

researcher is “typically involved in a sustained and intensive experience with the participants”,

which “introduces a range of strategic, ethical and personal issues into the qualitative research

process” (Creswell, 2009, p. 177). The phenomenon known as “observer bias” can potentially

affect or pose a threat to the validity of observation and interview studies (Gay & Airasian,

2003). Observer bias is “invalid information that results from the perspective the researcher

brings to the study” (Gay & Airasian, 2003, p. 213).

This perspective may negatively or positively affect both the research process and the

results. For this reason, qualitative researchers must walk a fine line as they attempt to be both

involved and unbiased (Gay & Airasian, 2003; Creswell, 2009; Maxwell, 2005). Ary, Jacob and

Razavieh (2002) assert that “the most common strategy to control for bias in qualitative studies

is reflexivity” (p. 454). Reflexivity is the use of self-reflection to recognize and actively search

for one’s biases, values and personal background that may affect the objectivity of the study

(Ary, Jacob & Razavieh, 2002; Creswell, 2009). Maxwell (2005) proposes what he calls a

“Researcher Identity Memo” (RIM) to develop one’s reflexivity.

The RIM is a tool that helps a researcher examine his or her goals, experiences,

assumptions, feelings and values as these relate to the researcher’s study, focusing on how these

factors might affect the study (Maxwell, 2005). I practiced reflexivity in a RIM during my first

course on research in Northeastern University doctoral program in Education, and I found the

memo approach an extremely useful tool for reminding myself of my own values, assumptions

and background as I worked on my research project. As Maxwell (2005) says with respect to

bias, “what is important is to understand how you are influencing what the informant says, and

how this affects the validity of the inferences you can draw from the interview” (p. 109).

A key background issue for my identity memo is the fact that I was born and bred in

Liberia, which is where I conducted my research. I attended several public schools in both rural

and urban Liberia. I lived under the leadership practices of principals at the schools I attended.

Some of the practices seemed questionable, which raised the question (particularly in the

aftermath of Liberia’s 14 years of destructive civil war) of whether Liberian public school

principals receive adequate leadership preparation and support to make them more effective in

their work. My knowledge of Liberian culture was an important factor that helped me gain

access to and develop interview rapport with the principals. Because I was aware of the bias that

my knowledge, values and perspectives could potentially have on the study, I kept an open mind

and conducted myself as an individual trying to learn how the principals perceived their

leadership development needs and related support issues (the reflexivity memo is in the appendix

section).

Limitations of Study

Geographical coverage was one limitation of the study. The research was confined to

Montserrado County, which is one of the 15 counties or political subdivisions of Liberia.

However, as noted earlier, Montserrado is the most ethnically diverse county, with the third

largest number of public primary schools, the second largest number of junior (middle) high

schools and the largest number of senior (secondary) high schools in the country (Ministry of

Education Census Report, 2008).

The size of the sample, 12 principals, was another limitation. Even though qualitative

research may not require as large a sample size as quantitative research, the number of principals

for the study could have been much larger if financial, logistical, time and security conditions

had permitted.

The cancellation of the planned recording of the personal interviews in order to ensure

the ease and cooperation of the principals was another limitation, as was the misinformation that

was disseminated by an authority of the MCSS about the motive of the researcher. This

politically orchestrated untruth seemed to have deterred some of the principals who had

previously agreed to participate in the study.

As explained earlier, measures taken to help address these limitations and to ensure the

validity of the findings and conclusion included the triangulation of data, detailed note-taking,

member checking, and documentation of the researcher’s bias through reflexivity.

Chapter IV: Report of Research Findings

This study addresses the following research question: “What are Liberian public school

principals’ perceived leadership development needs in post-conflict Liberia?” The study is based

on the following sources:

1. Responses of 12 Liberian public school principals in face-to-face interviews;

2. A short demographic questionnaire;

3. Select Liberian government documents; and

4. Select documents generated by international donors actively working in Liberia.

This chapter is organized into three sections. The first section summarizes the

demographic data of the 12 principals to give general background information about their

education, age and experience. This section also gives information about the review of the

interview protocol with the principals before the start of the interviews. The second section

presents the coded data from the data sources mentioned above. The final section discusses the

emergent categories and their corresponding themes that originated from the coded data.

Who Are the 12 Principals?

All 12 principals are Liberians and have had some teaching experience before ascending

to the principalship. Ten of the principals are men and two are women. As depicted in the graph

below (Figure 1), the principals were within the ages of 25 to 64 years old (none of them

younger than 25 years or older than 64 years). Similarly, the chart below (Figure 2) shows that

67% of the principals hold non-education degrees, while 25% possessed degrees within the

education field and 8% hold degrees or teaching certificates in education and other fields.

Figure 1. Data derived from demographic questionnaire.

Figure 2. Data derived from demographic questionnaire.

25%

67%

Principals' Degree Concentrations

Education

Non-education

Education & Non-education

Principals' Age Ranges

18-24 years

25-44 years

45-64 years

65 years & over

Only two of the 12 principals hold a Master’s degree, which happened to be in education

administration. Except for these two principals who took some education leadership courses in

their graduate programs, the rest of the principals did not undergo any prescribed leadership

education or training or hold any principalship licensure. The principals said that ascendency to

the principalship was largely based on teaching experience, political patronage, or social

connections or a combination of these factors. In addition to their teaching experience, some of

the principals previously served in capacities such as registrar, vice principal for instruction and

vice principal for administration.

The principals, like other public sector employees or Liberians generally, have to deal

with a range of harsh post-war economic realities, as they perform their job responsibilities. The

principals acknowledged that the Liberian government has increased their salaries considerably

in the last seven years. However, the rising costs of living is increasingly dwindling the

principals’ buying power. None of the 12 principals owned a private vehicle. They used public

transportation, which greatly lacked the capacity to meet the demands of commuters in Monrovia

and its environs (as well as in other parts of the country).

Interview Protocol Review

In compliance with the relevant legal and ethical requirements, I reviewed the interview

protocol with each principal. At the onset of each interview, I introduced myself as a doctoral

student at Northeastern University in the United States. This was in addition to the introduction

letters that I had given to the 12 principals who were selected as the sample size of the study.

I read the interview protocol that included the unsigned informed consent form, which

covered issues such as the purpose and possible effects of the study, the rights of participants to

freely take part in the study, and their option to withdraw from the study at any point and/or

answer or refuse to answer any question(s).

I also explained the short demographic questionnaire and the open-ended questions and

my desire to audio record the interview for accuracy. The principals didn’t generally like the idea

of being audio recorded as a way of taking precaution or protecting their jobs in a tough post-

conflict economic environment of high unemployment and political maneuvers. In consultation

with Northeastern University’s Institutional Review Board and my lead advisor, the plan to audio

record the interviews was dismissed, relying on my note taking during and after the interviews.

In addition, I assured the principals of my legal and ethical commitment to keep their identities

anonymous and any information they provided strictly confidential. I promised each principal

US$15.00 as a token of appreciation for his/her time. After reviewing the interview protocol, I

asked if the interviewee had any questions and then offered them a copy of the informed consent

form to review, if they so choose to participate. Most principals were satisfied with the review

and did not take the consent form.

Data Coding

Coding is one of the qualitative strategies for organizing data into chunks or segments so

that the data can be placed into categories or themes to bring meaning to the information

(Creswell, 2009). Put another way, coding is the process of reviewing the data for themes and

then marking those passages of text with code labels that basically forms summary descriptions

of the transcript (Gay and Airasian, 2000; Best & Kahn, 1993).

The interview notes were reviewed or re-read several times for familiarization and

completeness. In accordance with the recommendations of Seidman (1998) passages of interest

[themes or categories] were marked or coded with a pencil. The marked passages were classified

into categories that represented similar ideas, words, phrases, sentences, or thoughts, as

described in Gay and Airasian (2000). The constant comparison method was used to achieve the

classification. This method involves the repeated comparison of identified topics, ideas and

concepts to determine their distinctive characteristics and place them into appropriate categories

for the analysis (Gay & Airasian, 2000; Grinnell & Unrau, 2008). The contents of the categories

represent expressions related to the principals’ perceived operational challenges and leadership

development needs. The coding process was informed by the overarching research question and

interview questions.

The document review involved several policy and program documents of the Ministry of

Education and international donor organizations. One of the purposes of document analysis is to

describe prevailing practices and conditions, or ascertain the relative importance of, or interest in

certain topics or problems (Ary, Jacobs & Razavieh, 2002; Best & Kahn, 1993). The review and

coding of the document review were, as in the case of the interview data analysis, carefully done.

It focused mainly on discovering the “prevailing practices and conditions” (Best & Kahn, 1993,

p. 192) mentioned in the reports with respect to the problems of practice that the principals face,

and the extent to which the leadership development needs of these principals have been

prioritized and/or are being met in the aftermath of the civil war in Liberia.

Emergent Categories and Themes

From this iterative analysis of coding across the interview notes of all 12 principals, several

issues were identified under the following three primary categories:

1. School challenges;

(a) student discipline,

(b) exchange of money for grades,

(d) absenteeism and salary,

(e) overcrowding,

(f) administrative support, and

(g) school supplies.

2. Professional development needs essential for principals to be successful in Liberia;

(a) principal leadership education and training,

(b) need for leadership development programs

3. Principal leadership qualities essential for principals to be successful in their practice

in Liberia;

(a) positive attitude and disposition

(b) critical leadership attributes.

In the next several sections, each of the themes will be described in more detail as they

fall under each category along with several illustrative quotes as identified through the coding

process.

School Challenges

The principals pointed out a range of major problems that they face in their practice,

which were confirmed by the document review. But for the purpose of this analysis, the six most

often cited problems were identified as presented and discussed below.

Student discipline. Nearly all the principals said that this is a serious problem that cuts

across all grade levels in the public school system. Principal C, for example, noted that student

misbehavior had increased significantly in public schools in the aftermath of the civil war.

Principal C added that students today generally have little or no respect for their teachers, their

principals, and other school personnel or for their fellow students. He cited drug and alcohol use

as two of the factors responsible for the increase in student discipline issues. Principal D narrated

this situation: “Yesterday two students fought with razor blade. We have good students that

behave very well. But a lot of them are indiscipline.”

Principal E emphasized that the behavioral problems of students are seriously affecting

teaching and learning. She said, “There is a lot of student disciplinary problems in our school

system … and there is violence in some cases.” Principal I indicated that as a result of the

“difficult social and economic conditions caused by the war, many students have prematurely

become fathers, mothers or bread winners in their homes and they find it hard to take instructions

which they themselves give at home.”

Principal J highlighted the problem of indiscipline among the students, but placed more

emphasis on what he thought were the sources of the problem. He believed one source of student

indiscipline was the trauma of the war. After serving as principal for the past three years,

Principal J said he “believed that trauma plays a serious role in student anxiety and conduct”.

Exchange of money for grades. The exchange of money for grades is another problem

that all of the principals cited during the interviews, noting that this problem expresses itself in a

variety of ways. One way, Principal B pointed out, is that “some teachers will give very hard

tests or quizzes with the goal of getting the students to fail … the teachers will then solicit money

or the students will offer it in order to pass.” Principal A admitted that when he was a teacher in

the late 1990s, he participated in the cash-for-grades scheme. “I did this,” he explained, “because

at the time, we took pay twice a year … on Independence Day [July 26

] and Christmas

[December 25

].” He continued, “I knew that trading grades for money was unethical, but I and

my family had to survive.” He said that he has ended his corrupt behavior because today his

income is much better. However, Principal A added that as a principal, his experience with

corruption has helped him to better understand the money-grade exchange and to deal with

corrupt phenomena in his practice.

The principals also noted that a related problem is male teachers taking advantage of

young women students by exchanging sex for better grades. Principal B agreed that the cash-for-

grade scheme is rooted in the low salary levels of teachers, while Principal D thought that the

problem goes beyond low salaries and includes “bad ethical behavior on the part of the teachers

involved.” UNICEF quotes a report about some “teachers...accept [ing] bribes of money - and

sometimes sex - from students in exchange for higher grades…[and] both practices are common”

(“Liberian youths report on injustices,” 2010, paras. 3, 4 & 5). The report states that a Liberian

education official admitted that students sometimes buy grades to enable them to pass and get

promoted to the next class; the official also stated that teachers who use the bribes to supplement

their salaries are to be blamed as well.

A related problem is the use of a “flexibility fee.” This phenomenon relates to the

tendency of teachers and principals to collect money from students in exchange for the teachers

and principals securing copies of the yearly standardized exams, identifying the answers, and

then using texting or other convenient means to pass the answers on to the students when they

take the exams. Principal H said:

The flexibility fee is ugly and affects education as a salvation tool. It’s cheating. It harms

both administrators and students and the country. In one year, all the students in a number

of schools got the same answer correct. Cell phones were used to text exam answers to

students. No cell phones were allowed in the testing halls this year [2011] for the WAEC

(West African Examination Council).

Principal J said that some teachers and principals have been “fired for flexibility fee [and]

more need to be fired to fix the school system.” Principal F emphasized the underperformance of

students, but indicated that poverty was an important causal factor. He observed that many

students are self-supporting; they sell petty market (trade). “Poverty affects learning or

performance”, Principal F pointed out, noting that some “students come to school hungry. Things

are difficult on the children too.” He said that the Ministry of Education runs a school feeding

program in public schools; it is greatly helping to reduce the effects of hunger, but the program is

only intended for the primary school students.

Teacher qualification, absenteeism and salary. Another important problem the

principals pointed to was the ill-preparedness of most teachers in the public school system. They

stated that teachers are generally under-qualified in the subjects they teach. And it is difficult to

replace ill-prepared teachers because of the critical shortage of competent subject-matter

teachers. For example, “approximately 60% of Liberian primary teachers were untrained and,

probably, deficient in subject knowledge and, even, basic literacy” (USAID Report, 2009, p.2).

Teacher absenteeism or lateness was another major problem that many of the principals

mentioned. The principals said that to varying degrees, there is a practice amongst certain

teachers to arrive late for class or to be absent altogether. For example, Principal L stated that

one of his teachers would come to class at 3:00 P. M. when she should in fact be in class by 1:15

P. M. The principals attributed this type of behavior to the fact that some teachers teach at

multiple schools, usually with teaching jobs in both private and public schools. According to the

principals, the critical shortage of trained teachers in Liberia has created a great demand for

qualified teachers who in turn spread themselves thin to meet that demand.

In addition to the problems of lateness and absenteeism, Principal F observed that

teachers teaching at multiple schools tend to be “tired, ineffective and unprepared for class”.

Principal K lamented that in the Liberian culture, particularly in light of the social and political

connections that some of the teachers have, it is difficult to take drastic disciplinary action in

response to the teachers’ habitual lateness and/or absenteeism. “I once reported a teacher to our

district education officer for coming to class late, but no disciplinary action was taken against the

teacher,” Principal K lamented, referring to a political alliance that swept the issue under the rug.

Principal F claimed: “Many [of his teachers] are college graduates but many are also not

prepared to teach. Many have degrees in other disciplines.” Some teachers are good classroom

managers, while many are not; few teachers plan their lessons and review them before class

starts, declared one principal. He added that teachers often responded with “I forgot” when

pressed for a review or discussion of their lesson plan.

Principal E acknowledged that the teachers are trying, but said they have their own

problems: “Some [are] not qualified; some [are] impatient; some [are] in education because they

cannot find other opportunities elsewhere”. She noted that some teachers tend to come to class

without lesson plan, and are unable to manage their classes well. This makes some students to

loiter in the hallways of the school. The principal said she has to be present at school as much as

possible or else some teachers would leave their teaching duties for other destinations. “I make

visits to classrooms and around campus to make sure that things are under control and going

well”, Principal E indicated.

Some of the principals indicated that teachers who teach at both public and private

schools are motivated by the need to supplement their government salaries in order to meet the

high cost of living in Liberia. The World Bank’s Education Country Status Report (2010)

comments on the issue of teacher salary in Liberia: “The low teacher pay and the flat pay scales

are also postconflict phenomena, as all public servants were put on a very low and flat pay scale

as part of the recovery plan” (p. Xii).

Principal B stated that he preferred an income scale in which salaries would be far more

commensurate with actual cost of living and teachers’ qualifications. The principals noted that

their salaries had increased since the inception of the government of President Ellen Johnson

Sirleaf. However, they indicated that there was a need for an additional salary raise. A principal’s

salary—at the time of the interview in May 2011—was within the range of US$100 and US$125

per month, according to some principals. And a 100-pound bag of rice—Liberia’s staple—costs

between US$35 and US$50, depending on its quality. This state of affairs, Principal B noted, is

even worse when a principal is the only bread winner in his or her home. [In September 2011,

the government of Liberia announced a considerable increase in the salaries of civil servants,

which included teachers and principals (The New Dawn, 2011)].

Overcrowding. Another problem identified by the principals was overcrowding in their

schools and classrooms, which is the result of increased student enrollment and limited

classroom space. Principal C pointed out that the Government of Liberia has had “great success

in getting a lot of children off the streets through the free and compulsory education policy… but

we need bigger classrooms to accommodate these students.” Classes are “simply over-crowded,”

said Principal H, who has an average class size of 55 in his school. Principal G’s school has an

average class size of 60.

The Education Country Status Report (2010) recognizes that “overcrowding is common…”

(p. 6) in Liberian schools. The report adds that “the fact that 583 schools destroyed during the

civil conflict have yet to be rebuilt indicates the magnitude of the classroom availability

problem” (p. 81). Indeed, of the 12 principals interviewed, only Principals B and D had the

relatively small average class size of 45 students in their schools.

Administrative support. Four of the 12 principals mentioned the absence of a principal

handbook as another problem affecting their work. They indicated that a handbook which

outlines their duties and responsibilities would provide guidance to principals, especially new,

inexperienced and non-education-trained principals (those who do not have a background or

degree in education or educational leadership).

Principal I emphasized, “we urgently need a handbook to serve as a cornerstone for what

is expected of us and our responsibilities … and a handbook will help us to be better leaders.”

Principal B lamented the absence of policy or handbook for principals to guide them in their

daily functions. He indicated that to overhaul the school system or fix some of its problems,

handbooks for principals and students and teachers should be put in place and enforced.

Another area of support that most principals pointed out as a gross need was supervision.

The principals stressed the need for their supervisors and central offices to visit their schools

more often. The principals expected that routine visitations would provide the supervisors with a

better understanding and appreciation of the problems facing them, and that this may hopefully

lead to more central office support. Principal D said that “regular visits by our leaders or

supervisors will help to improve the running of the schools… it will help us to stop or control

teacher lateness and absenteeism.” Principal E made a similar point: “Visits from county or

district education officers can be a big help to us” in strengthening principals’ ability to deal with

the myriad problems affecting the schools. In addition, the principals underscored the need for

supervisors to be more responsive to issues and complaints that are brought to their attention.

Principal B asked for greater administrative support from his supervisors and education

leaders. He said: “DEOs and CEOs [are] not supervising us due to poor policy and transportation

problem. So principals are left alone”. “MOE supervisors hardly visit us. They need to come and

see what is happening in the schools”.

The Education Country Status Report (2010) also documented that there is limited

contact between the central authorities and the local authorities. The local education leaders, the

report said, “suffers from limited interaction with central managers” (p. 107) and that

“decentralized management capacity is currently restricted by limited communication and

contact between central ministry managers, county and district office staff, and schools, due to

poor physical and technical infrastructure” (p. 107).

School supplies. All the principals mentioned insufficient educational supplies and

operating funds as another main problem, saying that this problem greatly hampers the academic

and administrative management of their institutions. The principals explained that large parts of

their school operating funds were generated from student registration fees, so that the Ministry of

Education’s elimination of registration fees for elementary school students or the institution of

free and compulsory elementary education, along with a reduction of the fees that secondary

school students pay, has had a severe impact. It has limited the ability of public schools, and

particularly elementary schools, to raise operating funds for purchasing supplies such as toiletry

materials and for carrying out basic maintenance.

Principal C said that as a consequence, school personnel have to “chip in” to purchase

reams of papers, tissue, sanitizers and other school supplies. He elaborated:

It is hard for us to use our own money to buy supplies for office use and cleaning. But we

have no choice. We have to keep the bathrooms and classrooms and offices clean and

repair the furniture. We got our school supplies in January this year (2011). They lasted

for about a month, especially the toilet tissue. We have not received another supply to

date [as of the interview date in June, 2011]. As a result, we did not give some of our

tests because we did not have stationery.

Pointing to the window, Principal G observed: “As you can see, there are no windows on

this whole side of the building. No cleaning supplies” and school personnel have to buy supplies

to clean the environment, which caters to a student population of over 1,000 and an average class

size of 60-70 students, the principal added.

The lack of teaching materials was among the main problems that confront the public

school system, Principal C asserted. He said text books are insufficient to the point that teachers

have to copy portions of texts on the black board for students to take home to read. There is no

library also. “This school [’s] elementary session has a reader [prescribed text]...the junior high

does not have [one]”, the Principal C noted.

Professional Development Needs

This category relates to the professional development needs that principals feel are

crucial to being a successful principal in Liberia. The data in the Principal development needs

category constitute the bedrock answer to the research question, which is: “What are Liberian

public school principals’ perceived leadership development needs in post-conflict Liberia?” The

category has the following themes: 1) Principal leadership education and training; 2) Need for

leadership development programs and 3) Shortcomings of principal leadership development

efforts.

Principal leadership education and training. Most principals spoke about the

enormous academic, administrative and leadership challenges facing the public school system,

and about the gap in principal leadership knowledge. As indicated earlier in this chapter, only

two of the 12 principals interviewed hold graduate degrees, which happened to be in education

administration. Except for these two principals who took leadership courses in their graduate

programs, the rest of the principals did not undergo any prescribed or formal leadership

education or training or hold any principalship licensure.

Moreover, about two-thirds of the 12 principals have their degrees in non-education

fields. Some of the principals admitted that ascendency to the principalship tends to be largely

based on teaching experience, political patronage, social connections or a combination of these

factors. Proven leadership capability is not necessarily a key driver for promotion to the

principalship, according to some principals.

Principal A said that he has not attended a leadership workshop or in-service training

since he became the principal of his school about four years ago. Principal C echoed similar

sentiments. He said that he “cannot remember the last time” he attended a principal workshop on

school leadership. Principal D said, “since I joined the MCSS in [the late 1990s], I know of one

or two workshops for principals that I have attended.” Principal I indicated the general lack of

personal professional development initiative among Liberian public school principals: “Many of

us principals...lead by our experience or by heart”, suggesting a considerable leadership

knowledge gap.

Need for leadership development programs. This theme is closely related to the

previous theme depicting the need for initial principal leadership education and training. This

theme is related more to the ongoing professional development needs of principals. All the

principals interviewed spoke of the lack of well-formulated and ongoing programs to enhance

their leadership. They suggested that quality leadership preparation programs – in the form of

pre-service and in-service programs, workshops and seminars – are critical in the process of

successfully reforming and leading the public school system in post-conflict Liberia.

The Ministry of Education recognizes the leadership development needs that the

principals articulated. In a major policy document entitled: National Education Policies 2011:

Policies for Reform Through Analysis and Consultation, the Ministry of Education highlights the

importance of qualified principals in achieving its current goal of decentralizing the public

education system in Liberia. In this report, the Ministry states: “For decentralization to schools

to be successful, principals must acquire new skills in leadership and management—including

financial management, teacher and personnel management, and community relations” (p. 6).

Under the proposed decentralization plan, the Ministry and the counties are responsible

for developing education strategies and tactics, respectively, while the districts and schools are

responsible for the implementation of the tactics. The districts and schools are also required to

provide feedback so that appropriate and timely implementation adjustments can be made. This

is obviously a significant responsibility for principals, whose leadership capability, as the

decentralization proposal suggests, needs to be strengthened.

Similarly, the Ministry notes the need for principal training to ensure the achievement of

its Education for All (EFA) program. As part of its implementation strategy, the EFA program

had planned to “organize training workshops for all secondary school principals and teachers for

implementation [of the EFA strategy]” (EFA National Action Plan, 2004, p. 41).

Liberia’s EFA program represents a commitment to the global EFA initiative, which is an

international community partnership to provide primary education to all children of the world by

2015. This initiative was first launched in Jomtien, Thailand, in 1990 by the international

community and reaffirmed at a World Education conference in Dakar, Senegal in 2000 (World

Bank, 2009; Sperling, 2001).

In relationship to this issue, Principal A made the following points on training:

There is a great need for in-service workshops for both teachers and principals. A whole

lot of principals after the war do not have degrees or enough experience in education or

leadership. They need ongoing training that can help them to lead a school properly.

Some principals are new in the education field and were handpicked based on their social

and political connections. Good in-service programs will help all of us. The content of

such programs should include ethics, leadership skills, organizing school programs and

financial management.

Principal E also underscored the need for principal training. She indicated that there is an

“acute need for refresher programs to keep principals up-to-date” with current developments and

best practice in education leadership and to allow principals to share ideas. Principal J made a

similar point, noting that public school principals need leadership training opportunities to enable

them to develop “new ways” of looking at “education, students, the curricula and classroom

management”, along with other school reform issues.

Shortcomings of principal leadership development efforts. While the Liberian

government and its donor partners have recognized the crucial role of principals, efforts to

formulate quality professional development programs to strengthen the leadership capacity of

public school principals have been severely limited. The Liberian government policy document

entitled Education Sector Master Plan: 2000-2015 (2000) notes that “principals should serve as

educational leaders” and should be able to “supervise the teachers under their control” (p. 69).

To this end, “a Certificate Program in school supervision for High School principals [was

to] be instituted and implemented by the Department of Instruction of the Ministry of Education”

(p. 69). This training program was to be conducted during the vacation period at regional centers,

and its cost was to be borne mainly by the Ministry of Education. The accounts of the 12

principals interviewed and of the Ministry of Education’s 2008 Annual Report do not suggest

that the certificate program has been instituted.

In fact, the Ministry of Education 2008 Annual Report presented to the National

Legislature (Congress) reported conducting a wide range of workshops for teachers. It also

reported carrying out a “capacity building workshop for county and district education officers to

strengthen their skills in monitoring and supervision” (MOE 2008 Annual Report, p. 33) —who

are the supervisors of the principals. The annual report, however, did not mention the conduct of

similar capacity building workshops for principals.

In a related document on training, governance and management capacity, the World

Bank’s Education Country Status Report (2010) dealt heavily with the lack of adequate

professionally trained teachers and administrators at the central Ministry of Education, county

and district levels. While the report made specific reference to the need of developing the

leadership abilities of county education officers and the district education officers, [again, who

are the immediate supervisors of the public school principals], it did not however make a similar

specific reference to the training of principals.

As a part of efforts to address the training needs of public school principals, the Ministry

of Education, in its Education Sector Plan of Liberia: 2010-2020, states the following:

School principals have the main responsibility for school-level management, and the

Ministry has prioritized their capacity development. Through the Liberia Teacher

Training Project (LTTP), the MOE is developing a certification program for school

principals. A Principals’ Training Manual has been developed, and the MOE is piloting

an in-service training program for principals in six counties (p. 153).

While the Ministry of Education highlighted the need for trained school principals and its

collaboration with the United States Aid for International Development (USAID) funded LTTP

to meet the training needs of principals, a 2009 USAID assessment report notes that the

successful implementation of the LTTP was challenged by the absence of action or

accountability on the part of the Ministry of Education. The report said the Ministry was not

clear about its responsibilities with regard to teacher training, assignment of responsibilities,

chain of command and empowerment of the Ministry personnel to make decisions based on an

agreed-upon work plan. The report also indicates that these shortcomings of the Ministry

impeded progress in the implementation of training activities.

The LTTP is a USAID-funded teacher training program that was initiated in 2006 to

support the Ministry of Education’s development of a strategy to improve the teacher education

system (USAID Liberia, 2009, p. vii). LTTP provides teacher-focused, in-service education

program. The LTTP training program was not designed for principals, nor does it allocate

significant resources to their professional development needs. While USAID has been providing

some limited in-service training for public school principals in selected geographic areas in the

country, that agency reported that “participation in LTTP activities designed to strengthen

education governance by key education officials is sporadic” (USAID Liberia, p. vii). In

addition, the USAID report points out that the in-service training for principals under the LTTP

is not nationwide; it only operates in about a third of the country.

Principal Leadership Qualities

This third category, like the previous two, emerged from the data coding and analysis. It

reinforces the second category dealing with the principal development needs in that it discusses

the dispositions and skills that principals perceived as essential characteristics of their

professional development. Two themes were identified under the Principal leadership qualities

category: 1) positive attitude and disposition, and 2) critical leadership attributes and skills.

Positive attitude and disposition. Many of the principals recognized the importance of

having the right attitude and disposition in leadership. Attitude and disposition were portrayed in

a number of ways by the principals. One way to portray a positive attitude and disposition in

principalship practice is through punctuality, as suggested by Principal A. Punctuality is a wide-

spread problem among Liberians. It’s common knowledge that Liberians are not generally time

conscious. Urging his fellow principals to show regard for time, Principal J described punctuality

is a big African problem.

Stressing the need for the right attitude and disposition, Principal A described himself as

“an early bird” and said he takes his job seriously. In fact, he said he arrives at work at 6:00 A.

M. and stays until 5:30 P. M. when he heads to a private night school that he co-runs with a

colleague. Principal A recounted telling his staff about the disposition to take any assigned task

seriously: “If you’re committed to smaller things, the bigger things will come.” This is a

rephrased quotation from the Bible, which stresses the importance of the attitude and disposition

to take every responsibility seriously, whether big or small.

Many principals talked about the difficulty of their jobs, but indicated that this difficulty

can be overcome by having the right attitude and disposition. For example, Principals H

observed that the “Principal [’s] job in Liberia is a hard job…you are expected to solve all the

problems”. Principal H spoke about his positive attitude toward learning as a means of

improving his leadership performance: “Myself need refresher training...I buy my own books

and read for professional development.”

For his part, Principal L said that to be an effective principal, one has to have a positive

disposition rooted in honesty, love for kids, kindness, helping teachers and solving problems.

Critical leadership attributes and skills. Attitude and disposition aside, most of the

principals enumerated specific attributes and skills they considered critical for success in their

practice. Some principals indicated that they use these attributes and skills at varying degrees in

executing their responsibilities. Most principals simply stated the importance of possessing these

skills.

One of the most common positive attributes shared by principals was a clear commitment

to work. In the words of the principals, this could be demonstrated in the following ways:

passion, compassion, creative problem solving, good judgment, patience, monitoring and

evaluation, and ethical behavior. Principal D regarded commitment as a vital attribute for

leadership success, adding that “school leaders must be committed for the betterment of the

students and the nation.”

Similarly, Principal B identified commitment, dedication, and passion as important

principal qualities. Principal J also cited passion as a valuable attribute for principals because it is

likely to inspire one to not only become a principal for the sake of the income, but also for

service to the nation. He noted that passion also leads to respect for colleagues and students.

Principal D pointed out that principals should possess strong ethical values to make good

decisions in their practice. Principal F also regarded good judgment and ethical disposition as

vital principal attributes. He observed: “you got to be ethical as a principal and as a role model

who deals with these students everyday”. Principal J described creativity as very important and

argued that leadership in post-conflict Liberia tends to be characterized by confusion because

“…these are unusual times in the school system and the country as a whole and principals need

to be creative to solve problems.”

Principal F said patience is an essential attribute for principals and other school

authorities, because they “face difficult problems pertaining to students, teachers, parents and

other people” every day. He stressed that the “job of a principal is hard … and hard jobs need

people with patience so that you cannot quickly jump to conclusion” on issues. He noted that

patience is also needed to reconcile differences among teachers and students or to calm parents

when they are unhappy about some school issues.

In keeping with these ideals, the principals stated that they should be democratic,

culturally competent, and sensitive in their leadership. As discussed by the principals, these

attributes could be evidenced in: principals’ disposition to consult with their staff, engage in

attentive listening, participatory decision-making, and effective communication; freely

recognizing and cooperating with their community; and, when needed, employing effective

conflict resolution strategies.

Principal D suggested that principals should be consultative and involve stakeholders to

get their views in making decisions that affect schools. “Principals must have...[the] ability to

involve those concerned in the decision making process”, Principal D reiterated. Similarly,

Principal E used the term “consultative” to describe a key skill that principals should possess in

their decision-making and leadership roles. She said of her personal decision making: “we

consult with our faculty…for small and big issues”. She strongly believes that leadership is about

consultation. Principals should always show the willingness to listen and learn and to be a good

thinker, Principal B added.

Principal A named “participatory leadership style” as important attribute that principals

and other school leaders should possess in order to make a positive impact on the school system.

He said that a related skill is to “give credit to where it is due”; that is, to recognize the good

works that others do in running a school.

Principal A cited an example that occurred at the end of one academic year, when he

planned a program to honor a janitor and a teacher who were very committed to their duties. He

said that the two honorees did not know about this until their names were announced at the

closing program, adding that “both of the men cried … the janitor said that for the 28 years he

has worked in the school system, this was the first time that he had been honored.”

Principal I mentioned supervisory and cooperative skills as key leadership skills for

principals. Principal H expanded on a host of attributes of an effective principal as follows:

My son [a common way for Liberian adults to address young men], I have been in

education long enough to know that principals must have administrative skills; they must

be qualified and knowledgeable as an educator; they must understand the way education

in Liberia works; they must have human and people skills and understand human nature;

and they must have dedication and compassion for what we do. Otherwise, you will just

be a principal for the sake of being Mr. or Ms. principal.

Summary of Findings

The study sought to answer this research question: “What are Liberian public school

principals’ perceived leadership development needs in post-conflict Liberia?” Obtained from

personal interviews with 12 public school principals and select Liberian government and donor

reports and policy documents, the data analysis suggests that public school principals are faced

with numerous problems of practice, and a tremendous need for principal leadership

development in post-conflict Liberia.

The need for well-prepared and effective principals is compelling, especially in view of

the myriad problems confronting the war-ravaged public school system in Liberia. The problems

range from the lack of qualified teachers to insufficient school supplies to student disciplinary

issues to classroom overcrowding. The principals emphasized the lack of systematic and ongoing

pre-service, in-service and related programs that would provide them the knowledge and skills to

be effective school leaders.

While the Ministry of Education and international donors are aware of the challenges

confronting the public school system, and the need for the leadership development of the

principals, efforts to establish systematic programs that meet this need are limited and

unorganized.

This does not suggest that the Ministry of Education and its donor partners are not

working to make the public education system more functional. The state of affairs in Liberia’s

post-education environment apparently speaks to the extensive decimation of the education

landscape and the country as a whole during the civil crisis. This assertion is supported by the

interviews of the principals and review of available reports and policy documents of the Ministry

of Education and some international education donors.

Chapter V: Discussion of Research Findings and Implications

Revisiting the Problem of Practice

Principal leadership effectiveness remains a major concern throughout the world, and

especially in Africa. As one study concluded, only 25% of school principals in the United States

are prepared to be effective instructional leaders (Barnett, 2004); similarly, a study in Ghana

found that public school principals tend to lack adequate leadership qualifications (Hope,

Respress & Zame, 2008). This reality contrasts with the fact that the principalship is more

difficult, time-consuming and pivotal today than ever before (Kafka, 2009; Lynch, 2012;

Ramalho, Garza & Merchant, 2010).

Particularly in a time of increasing public demand for accountability, and in light of

research confirming that the quality of leadership has a major impact on the overall effectiveness

of schools, surprisingly little attention has been given to how people become principals and how

principals are supported in their work (Chapman, 2005; Salazar, 2007).

The benefits of having well-qualified principals are widely documented. Kafka (2009), in

his study of the history of the principalship, observes: “A growing body of literature suggests

that there is a discernible relationship between school leaders’ actions and student achievement”

(p. 318). Clearly, the principal plays a key role in creating an effective school environment by

maintaining an orderly school climate, establishing a uniform discipline policy, and involving

and supporting teachers and staff in school activities (Chapman, 2005; Shah, Sultana, Hassain &

Ali, 2011).

The principal also potentially affects the attitude, social climate, morale, progress,

cooperation and strategic directions of the school (Shah, Sultana, Hassain & Ali, 2011). Fullan

(2002) emphasizes this point: “System transformation of the type [that] educators now aspire to

cannot be accomplished without first ensuring solid leadership at all levels of the system” (p. 1).

The present study investigated the perceptions of Liberian public school principals regarding

their post-conflict leadership development needs. It is crucial to understand their leadership

needs because, as Mathibe (2007) has documented, “many schooling systems do not fulfill their

mandates because of poor management and leadership” (p. 523).

The inadequacy of principal preparation noted in the literature is significant for Liberia,

given the post-conflict constraints confronting its educational system and the urgent need for

reform. In 2003, Liberia finally emerged from a 14-year war that devastated the country and its

educational system (International Rescue Committee, 2002). An understanding of the leadership

development needs of public school principals in Liberia is critical for successful education

reform and the country’s overall socio-economic and political development. Hence, this study

addressed the following research question: “What are Liberian public school principals’

perceived leadership development needs in post-conflict Liberia?”

Review of the Methodology

This is a descriptive study of the perceptions of Liberian public school principals about

their leadership development needs. A qualitative research design was deemed suitable for

providing the data necessary to answer the study’s research question. One major advantage of

using a qualitative research design is that data is collected in face-to-face interactions with

selected persons in their professional settings, which allows the researcher to gain insight into a

social phenomenon from the perspectives of the participants (Gay, 1996; Krathwohl, 1993;

McMillan & Schumacher, 2006).

Context and data collection. I conducted the study in May 2010 in Montserrado

County, where Liberia’s capital, Monrovia, is located. Montserrado County was selected

100

primarily because it is currently the most diversely populated county in Liberia; it is like a

microcosm of Liberia. The Ministry of Education, which oversees all public education in Liberia,

is located in Monrovia. Of the 15 counties that constitute Liberia, Montserrado County has the

third largest number of public primary schools, the second largest number of junior (middle

high) schools and the largest number of senior (secondary high) schools (Liberian Ministry of

Education, 2008).

Data was collected from two main sources: 1) in-depth, semi-structured interviews, and

2) a review of select policy and program documents. The in-depth interviews were open-ended

and were conducted face-to-face with 12 public school principals. Detailed notes were taken and

subsequently analyzed to determine categorization and thematic patterns. A similar analysis was

done with some major policy and program documents of the Liberian government as well as its

donor partners working in the public education domain in Liberia. The document review focused

primarily on discovering the “prevailing practices and conditions” (Best & Kahn, 1993, p. 192)

with respect to the extent to which the professional leadership development needs of public

school principals have been prioritized and/or met in the aftermath of the civil war. Data from

the two sources were triangulated.

Each interview lasted more than an hour. The shortest and the longest interviews lasted

70 and 90 minutes, respectively. Each interview lasted until the principal had apparently reached

saturation level in sharing his or her experiences. Because the interviews were not audio-

recorded, I asked each principal to kindly speak at a reasonable pace and to accept as many

clarifying questions as possible to facilitate my accurate and detailed note-taking. After each

interview, a short questionnaire seeking demographic information from the 12 principals was

administered (Appendix D).

101

Participants. A purposive sampling method was used to select the 12 public school

principals who comprised the sample. Qualitative researchers generally use purposive sampling,

which is the process of deliberately selecting participants who are capable of providing pertinent

information on the specific topic or setting under investigation (Creswell, 2009; Gay & Airasian,

2000; Patten, 2005; Seidman, 1998). The study participants were chosen according to their

experience as currently practicing principals who could provide information relevant to the

research question.

The 12 principals included 6 primary school principals (from kindergarten to grade nine)

and 6 secondary school principals (grade nine to grade twelve). The sample also included 10

male and 2 female principals. This gender imbalance reflected the fact that there are fewer

female than male public school principals in Montserrado County and in Liberia as a whole.

Before the start of the interview, I reviewed the interview protocol with each principal. The

interviews were not audio-recorded as I had originally planned. The principals’ political and

economic concerns necessitated this, and my advisor and the Institutional Review Board

approved of this development.

Data analysis. The first step in any qualitative data analysis is to organize the data (Ary,

Jacobs & Razavieh, 2002; Best & Kahn, 1993). The coding of the data began with a review of

the interview notes for familiarization and completeness. The data was re-read several times after

all interviews were complete. Passages of interest were marked in pencil, and marked passages

were classified into categories that represented similar ideas, words, phrases, sentences, or

thoughts (Seidman, 1998; Gay and Airasian, 2000).

The constant comparison method was used to achieve the classification. This method

involves the repeated comparison of identified topics and ideas to determine their placement into

102

appropriate categories to be used for the analysis of the interview data (Gay & Airasian, 2000;

Grinnell & Unrau, 2008). The review and coding of the document review were, as in the case of

the interview data analysis, done carefully.

Validity and credibility. Validity and credibility threats were monitored throughout the

research process. Validity and credibility threats concern ways in which the researcher might go

wrong (Maxwell, 2005). Given that validity is one of the criteria that determines the accuracy of

a qualitative study (Creswell, 2009), three strategies were employed to rule out what Maxwell

(2005) describes as “specific plausible alternatives and threats to your interpretations and

explanations” (p. 107).

The three strategies used to ensure data accuracy were: 1) triangulation, which involves

the use of multiple data sources to cross-check information (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006); 2)

member checking, which relates to the process of sharing the researcher’s interpretation and

conclusion with the actual participants for verification and insights (Johnson, 1979); and 3)

articulation of the researcher’s bias. Research bias is the tendency for researchers to select data

that fit into their existing theory or preconceptions (Maxwell, 2005), and a detailed memo

articulating the researcher’s beliefs or bias was written to avoid interjecting these beliefs into the

study.

Protection of human subjects. The study was meticulously guided by the relevant legal

and ethical considerations of Northeastern University Internal Institutional Review Board (IRB).

In collaboration with the IRB, I prepared an unsigned informed consent form that was used to

obtain the informed consent of participating principals. This was necessary to ensure what Best

and Kahn (1993) describe as a “complete understanding of the procedures employed, the risks

involved, and the demands that may be made upon participants” (p. 45).

103

As Crowl (1993) notes, anonymity and confidentiality are important issues, and I assured

the participants that all information obtained during the study would be held in strict

confidentiality. The use of codes has kept the identities of the principals anonymous. Before the

start of each interview, I emphasized the issues of anonymity and confidentiality along with the

other considerations contained in the informed consent form and the introductory letter.

Limitations of the study. Geographical coverage was one of the study’s limitations. The

research was confined to Montserrado County, which is one of the 15 counties or political

subdivisions of Liberia. As noted earlier, though, Montserrado is the most ethnically diverse

county, with the third largest number of public primary schools, the second largest number of

junior (middle) high schools and the largest number of senior (secondary) high schools in the

country (Ministry of Education, 2008).

The small size of the sample (i.e., 12 principals) was another limitation. Even though

qualitative research may not require as large a sample as quantitative research, the number of

principals included in the study could have been much larger if financial, logistical, time and

security conditions had permitted. The cancellation of the planned recording of the personal

interviews in order to ensure the ease and cooperation of the principals was another limitation, as

was the misinformation that was disseminated by an authority of the MCSS about the motive of

the researcher. This politically orchestrated untruth seemed to have deterred some principals who

had previously agreed to participate.

As explained earlier, measures taken to help address these limitations and to ensure the

validity of the findings and conclusion included the triangulation of data, detailed note-taking,

member checking, and documentation of the researcher’s bias through reflexivity.

104

Summary of Findings

The coding and thematic analysis of the data produced three primary emergent categories

with their corresponding themes. These categories are as follows: 1) school challenges; 2)

professional development needs required for principals to be successful in Liberia; and 3)

principal leadership qualities essential for principals to be successful in their practice in Liberia.

School challenges. This category includes six of the themes most cited by the principals:

student discipline, exchange of money for grades, teacher qualification, absenteeism and salary,

overcrowding, administrative support, and school supplies. These problems, the principals

pointed out, are among the main challenges confronting their practice.

Student discipline. Nearly all principals mentioned student discipline as a serious

problem across all grade levels in the public school system. Principal C, for example, noted that

student misbehavior became widespread in public schools in the aftermath of the civil war. He

complained that students are generally disrespectful and cited drug and alcohol use as two of the

factors responsible for the increase in student misbehavior. Principal E spoke of the effects of

student behavioral problems on teaching and learning. She expressed concern that, “there is a lot

of student disciplinary problems in our school system … and there is violence in some cases.”

Principal D confirmed the existence of school violence: “Yesterday, two students fought with

razor blades. We have good students that behave very well. But a lot of them are indiscipline.”

Both Principal I and Principal J highlighted the problem of student indiscipline, and attributed

this problem to war-related trauma and circumstances.

Exchange of money for grades. The exchange of money for grades is another problem

that all principals cited during interviews. Principal B described his experience: “Some teachers

will give very hard tests or quizzes with the goal of getting the students to fail … the teachers

105

will then solicit money or the students will offer it in order to pass.” Principal A admitted that

when he was a teacher in the late 1990s, he participated in the cash-for-grades scheme. “I did

this,” he explained, “because at the time, we took pay twice a year … on Independence Day [July

] and Christmas [December 25

].” He continued, “I knew that trading grades for money was

unethical, but I and my family had to survive.” He said that he has ended his corrupt behavior

because today his income is much better.

Another aspect of the problem is the tendency, according to Principal A, for male

teachers to take advantage of young women students by exchanging sex for better grades. A

UNICEF document references this practice: “Teachers . . . accept bribes of money – and

sometimes sex – from students in exchange for higher grades . . . [and] both practices are

common” (“Liberian youths report on injustices,” 2010, paras. 3, 4 & 5). A related problem is

the use of a “flexibility fee.” This phenomenon relates to the tendency of teachers and principals

to collect money from students in exchange for copies of the yearly standardized exams, and then

using texting or other convenient means to pass the answers on to the students when they take

the exams.

Teacher qualification, absenteeism and salary. Another important problem that

principals pointed out was the ill-preparedness of most teachers in the public school system.

They stated that teachers are generally underqualified in the subjects they teach. Moreover, it is

difficult to replace ill-prepared teachers due to the critical shortage of competent subject-matter

teachers. For example, “approximately 60% of Liberian primary teachers were untrained and,

probably, deficient in subject knowledge and, even, basic literacy” (USAID Report, 2009, p. 2).

Teacher absenteeism or lateness is another major problem that many principals mentioned.

The principals said that, to varying degrees, there is a practice amongst certain teachers to arrive

106

late for class or be absent altogether. The principals attributed this type of behavior to the fact

that some teach at multiple schools. It is hard to punish these teachers because some are well

connected to powerful people and/or trying to supplement their salaries. Teacher salaries have

been increased somewhat considerably in recent times but remain insufficient to meet teachers’

post-war economic needs.

Overcrowding. Another problem identified by the principals is the overcrowding of their

schools and classrooms due to increased student enrollment and limited classroom space.

Principal C pointed out that the Government of Liberia has had “great success in getting a lot of

children off the streets through the free and compulsory education policy . . . but we need bigger

classrooms to accommodate these students.” Classes are “simply over-crowded,” said Principal

H, who has an average class size of 55 in his school. Similarly, Principal G’s school has an

average class size of 60.

Administrative support. Four of the 12 principals mentioned the absence of a principal

handbook as another problem affecting their work. A handbook that outlines their duties and

responsibilities, they stated, would provide guidance to principals, especially new, inexperienced

and non-education-trained principals (i.e., those who have no background or degree in education

or educational leadership). Another area of support that most principals pointed out as a gross

need is supervision; the principals emphasized the need for their supervisors and central offices

to visit their schools more often. It was expected by the principals that routine visitations would

provide the supervisors with a better understanding and appreciation of the problems facing

them, and that this might hopefully lead to more central office support. Principal D said that

“regular visits by our leaders or supervisors will help to improve the running of the schools…,”

while Principal E indicated that “visits from county or district education officers can be a big

107

help to us” in strengthening principals’ ability to deal with the many problems affecting the

schools.

School supplies. All principals mentioned insufficient educational supplies and

operating funds as another main problem, saying that this problem greatly hampers the academic

and administrative management of their institutions. The principals explained that large parts of

their school operating funds were generated from student registration fees, so the Ministry of

Education’s elimination of registration fees for elementary school students and the institution of

free and compulsory elementary education, along with the reduction of the fees that secondary

school students pay, have all had a severe impact. This has limited the ability of public schools,

and particularly elementary schools, to raise operating funds for purchasing supplies such as

toiletry materials and for basic maintenance. Principal C said that, as a consequence, school

personnel now have to “chip in” to purchase reams of paper, tissue, sanitizers and other school

supplies. A related problem facing the public school system is the lack of teaching materials such

as textbooks and teaching aids.

Professional development needs. This primary category is concerned with factors that

are essential for principals to be successful in Liberia. Three main themes comprise the category:

1) principal leadership education and training; 2) need for leadership development programs; and

3) shortcomings of principal leadership development efforts. The data in the professional

development needs category, along with those in the third category of principal leadership

qualities, constitute the bedrock on which the answer to the research question will stand.

Principal leadership education and training. Most principals described the enormous

challenges they face and the virtual absence of principal leadership education and training

opportunities. Only two of the 12 principals interviewed hold graduate degrees, which happened

108

to be in education administration. The rest had not taken any prescribed or formal leadership

education or training course. Approximately two-thirds of the 12 principals have degrees in non-

education fields. Some admitted that promotion to the principalship in Liberia is often largely

influenced by the promotee’s teaching experience, political patronage, social connections or a

combination thereof, adding that proven leadership capability is not necessarily a key driver of

promotion.

Principal A said that he has not attended a leadership workshop or in-service training

since he became the principal of his school about four years ago. Principal C echoed similar

sentiments that he “cannot remember the last time” that he attended a workshop on school

leadership. Principal D said, “since I joined the MCSS in [the late 1990s], I know of one or two

workshops for principals that I have attended.”

Need for leadership development programs. This theme relates closely to the previous

theme depicting the need for initial principal leadership education and training. This theme is

related more to the ongoing professional development needs of principals. All the principals

interviewed spoke of the lack of well-formulated and ongoing programs designed to enhance

their leadership. They suggested that quality leadership preparation programs – in the form of

pre-service and in-service programs, workshops and seminars – are critical to the process of

successfully reforming and leading the public school system in post-conflict Liberia.

The Ministry of Education recognizes these leadership development needs that the

principals articulated. One of the Ministry’s major policy documents highlights the importance

of qualified principals in achieving its current goal of decentralizing the public education system

in Liberia: “For decentralization to schools to be successful, principals must acquire new skills in

109

leadership and management—including financial management, teacher and personnel

management, and community relations” (p. 6).

Principal A, on the need for professional development programs, made some points on

training:

There is a great need for in-service workshops for both teachers and principals. A whole

lot of principals after the war do not have degrees or enough experience in education or

leadership. They need ongoing training that can help them to lead a school properly.

Some principals are new in the education field and were handpicked based on their social

and political connections. Good in-service programs will help all of us. The content of

such programs should include ethics, leadership skills, organizing school programs and

financial management.

Principal E also underscored the need for principal training. She indicated that there is an “acute

need for refresher programs to keep principals up to date” with current developments and best

practices in education leadership and to allow principals to share ideas. For his part, Principal J

said that public school principals need leadership training opportunities to enable them to

develop “new ways” of looking at “education, students, the curricula and classroom

management,” in addition to other school reform issues.

Shortcomings of principal leadership development efforts. The Liberian government

and its donor partners have also recognized the crucial role played by principals; however, these

stakeholders have also recognized that various factors severely constrain any effort to formulate

quality professional development programs to strengthen the leadership capacity of public school

principals. A Liberian government policy document notes that “principals should serve as

educational leaders” and should be able to “supervise the teachers under their control” (p. 69). In

this direction, the Ministry decided to launch “a Certificate Program in school supervision for

High School principals” (p. 69). This program was to be conducted during the vacation

(Summer) period at regional centers; however, the accounts of the 12 principals interviewed and

110

the Ministry of Education’s 2008 Annual Report do not suggest that the certificate program has

been instituted.

In fact, the Ministry of Education’s 2008 Annual Report, when presented to the National

Legislature (Congress), reported that a wide range of workshops had been provided for teachers.

It also reported carrying out a “capacity building workshop for county and district education

officers to strengthen their skills in monitoring and supervision” (MOE 2008 Annual Report, p.

33) (i.e., the supervisors of the principals). The annual report, however, did not mention the

conducting of similar capacity building workshops for principals.

The World Bank’s Education Country Status Report (2010) reported the lack of adequate

professionally trained teachers and administrators at the Ministry of Education, county and

district levels. The report, however, did not make a specific reference to the leadership training

needs of principals. The United States Aid for International Development (USAID), which has

been collaborating with the Ministry of Education to meet some of the training needs of

principals under the Liberia Teacher Training Program (LTTP), said in a 2009 report that the

successful implementation of their collaborative efforts was challenged by the absence of action

or accountability on the part of the Ministry of Education. The report further stated that in-

service training for principals under the LTTP is not nationwide; it only operates in about one-

third of the country.

Principal leadership qualities. This third category reinforces the second category,

which deals with principals’ leadership development needs. The third category discusses the

dispositions and skills that principals perceived as essential characteristics of their professional

development. Two themes were identified under the principal leadership qualities category: 1)

positive attitude and disposition, and 2) critical leadership attributes and skills.

111

Positive attitude and disposition. Many principals recognized the importance of having

the right attitude and disposition in leadership. Attitude and disposition were portrayed in a

number of ways by different principals. Principal A suggested that one way to portray a positive

attitude and disposition in principal leadership practice is through punctuality, which is a

widespread problem among Liberians. He described himself as “an early bird” and said he takes

his job seriously. In fact, he said he arrives at work at 6:00 AM and stays until 5:30 PM, at which

time he heads to a private night school that he co-runs with a colleague. Principal A recounted

telling his staff about the disposition required to take any assigned task seriously: “If you’re

committed to smaller things, the bigger things will come.”

Many principals discussed the importance of having the right attitude and disposition in

confronting the difficulty of their jobs. For example, Principals H observed that the “principal

[’s] job in Liberia is a hard job . . . you are expected to solve all the problems.” Principal H

spoke of his positive attitude toward learning as a means of improving his leadership

performance: “Myself need refresher training . . . I buy my own books and read for professional

development.” Principal L indicated that to be an effective principal one has to have a positive

disposition rooted in honesty, love for kids, kindness, helping teachers and solving problems.

Critical leadership attributes and skills. Attitude and disposition aside, most principals

enumerated specific attributes and skills they considered critical for success in their practice.

Some indicated that they use these attributes and skills to varying degrees in executing their

responsibilities. Most principals simply stated the importance of possessing these skills. One of

the most common positive attributes among principals was a clear commitment to work. In the

words of the principals, this could be demonstrated in numerous ways: passion, compassion,

creative problem solving, good judgment, patience, monitoring and evaluation, and ethical

112

behavior. Principal D regarded commitment as a vital attribute for leadership success, adding

that “school leaders must be committed for the betterment of the students and the nation.”

Principal D pointed out that principals should possess strong ethical values to make good

decisions in their practice. Principal F also regarded good judgment and ethical disposition as

vital principal attributes. He observed: “You got to be ethical as a principal and as a role model

who deals with these students every day.” Principal J described creativity as very important and

argued that leadership in post-conflict Liberia tends to be characterized by confusion because

“…these are unusual times in the school system and the country as a whole, and principals need

to be creative to solve problems.”

Principal F said patience is an essential attribute for principals and other school

authorities because they “face difficult problems pertaining to students, teachers, parents and

other people” every day. He stressed that the “job of a principal is hard . . . and hard jobs need

people with patience so that you cannot quickly jump to conclusions” on issues. In keeping with

these ideals, the principals stated that they should be democratic, culturally competent, and

sensitive in their leadership. As discussed by the principals, these attributes could be evidenced

in various forms: principals’ disposition to consult with their staff, engage in attentive listening,

participatory decision-making, and effective communication; freely recognizing and cooperating

with their community; and, when needed, employing effective conflict resolution strategies.

Principal A named “participatory leadership style” as an important attribute for principals

and other school leaders to possess in order to make a positive impact on the school system. He

said that a related skill is to “give credit to where it is due”; that is, to recognize the good works

that others do in running a school. Principal I mentioned supervisory and cooperative skills as

113

key leadership skills for principals. Principal H expanded on a host of attributes of an effective

principal as follows:

My son [a common way for Liberian adults to address young men], I have been in

education long enough to know that principals must have administrative skills; they must

be qualified and knowledgeable as an educator; they must understand the way education

in Liberia works; they must have human and people skills and understand human nature;

and they must have dedication and compassion for what we do. Otherwise, you will just

be principal for the sake of being Mr. or Ms. principal.

Discussion of Findings in Relation to the Theoretical Framework

It is crucial to state the relationship between the theoretical framework and literature

review of this study. One function of a theoretical framework, as Radhakrishna, Yoder and

Ewing (2007) indicate, is to identify the “literature review categories” (p. 692) of a study. The

theoretical framework in turn leads the researcher to the literature or existing knowledge on the

problem or phenomenon being studied (“Importance of a Good Literature Review,” 2012).

Thus, the theoretical framework and literature review of this study shared some common

categories or themes. In terms of relating the study’s findings to the theoretical framework and

literature review, the themes are discussed in terms of somewhat different details and/or from

different perspectives. The study’s findings are strongly related to its theoretical framework in

the following thematic ways: 1) education and conflict; 2) leadership theories; and 3)

professional development.

Education and conflict. Smith (2005) describes the relationship between education and

conflict as an emerging and increasingly important field. The evolving field of conflict and

education raises two important questions: 1) Should education policy in a post-conflict context

aim at mainly reconstructing the pre-conflict education infrastructure? and 2) Should education

policy in a post-conflict environment aim to recreate the education system entirely? (Paulson &

114

Rappleye, 2007). The question of whether Liberia should pursue a post-conflict policy of

education reconstruction or the broader policy of education recreation appears to be an evolving

challenge, where the Ministry of Education and its donor partners have been heavily

concentrating on the reconstruction of the public education system but are currently making

efforts to incorporate some recreation programs into the public education system.

Education reconstruction policy. In education reconstruction, education actors attempt to

rebuild destroyed school facilities, to address socio-psychological issues such as post-conflict

trauma, and to address economic and practical issues through measures such as recruiting

teachers, providing school supplies, paying teachers’ salaries and ensuring access to education

for girls (Paulson & Rappleye, 2007; Davies, 2004; Smith, 2005). Reconstruction has for many

years been the thrust of World Bank intervention in war-ravaged countries; however, the World

Bank has now shifted its attention considerably toward education recreation (Paulson &

Rappleye, 2007; World Bank, 2005).

In one of its major education plans, the Ministry of Education prioritized the following

areas: 1) infrastructure expansion and improvement, 2) instructional material and curriculum

development, 3) teacher development, 4) accelerated learning programs for older students, 5)

advisory supervision and assessment services, 6) education sector governance, 7) organizational

capacity, and 8) institutional and implementation arrangements. These education domains are

consistent with reconstruction policy.

Another example of how the study’s findings relate to the theoretical framework of

reconstruction policy has to do with the efforts of the Liberian government to improve educators’

salaries. Since the end of Liberia’s 14-year war in 2003, and the inception of the first post-

conflict constitutionally elected government in 2006, the Government of Liberia has taken

115

serious strides to increase educators’ salaries. The latest raise was announced in September 2011

(The New Dawn, 2011).

The reconstruction policy is also reflected in the work of USAID. As mentioned before,

USAID runs the Liberia Teacher Training Program (LTTP), which provides in-service training

for public school teachers (USAID Liberia, 2009, p. vii). The LTTP reflects the need that

“approximately 60% of Liberian primary teachers were untrained and, probably, deficient in

subject knowledge and, even, basic literacy” (USAID Report, 2009, p. 2). It also reflects the fact

that “teachers are the most critical resource in education reconstruction” (World Bank, 2005, p.

49).

Education recreation policy. In contrast to the education reconstruction policy, the

education recreation policy involves not only rebuilding damaged schools and providing support

to educators but looking more deeply at the ways in which education may have contributed to the

conflict and attempting to design curricula and programs to prevent a recurrence of the conflict

(Paulson, 2009; Paulson & Rappleye, 2007). Paulson (2009) argues that a reconstruction policy

may “fail to respond to structures, policies, and teaching/learning processes that may have

contributed to conflict” (p. 5); therefore, it is detrimental to ignore the role of a recreation policy.

Smith (2005) contends that reconstruction policies should serve as a basis for the longer-term

development of a “conflict sensitive education” (p. 387)—Smith’s terminology for education

recreation.

A conflict-sensitive education or recreation policy should, among other things, go beyond

reconstructing physical facilities to include peace building, human rights education, conflict

analysis, reconciliation and conflict prevention (Smith, 2005; Paulson, 2009; Paulson &

Rappleye, 2007). From the perspective of curriculum, the findings suggest that the Ministry of

116

Education and its partners are still struggling to adopt or integrate a recreation policy into

existing reconstruction programs. The curriculum is a key distinguishing feature between a

policy of reconstruction and one of recreation. One does not need a curriculum to effectively

reconstruct a school or raise teacher salaries, but some kind of curriculum is needed to

effectively plan and teach school children about peace education, conflict resolution and

prevention, reconciliation, and human rights in the public school system.

The findings speak to the increasing importance of integrating recreation programs into

the existing reconstruction curricula to ensure a new social normalcy through peace education,

conflict resolution training, and trauma counseling in schools (Davies, 2004). In collaboration

with other international organizations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO) and the International Institute for Education Planning (IIEP) (2011)

documented the following in a study:

In addition to being outdated, curriculum and textbooks in Liberia appear to be of little

relevance. In fact, they seem to have failed to provide useful knowledge, attitudes and

skills in the economic and social context in which Liberian learners live. Discussions on

the quality of education cannot ignore the issues of curriculum and textbooks. In Liberia,

curriculum and textbooks are both outdated. The primary curriculum currently in use

dates from 1996. Recently, however, a new curriculum has been developed to meet West

African Examinations Council (WAEC) requirements and includes HIV/AIDS education,

peace education, human rights, and critical thinking. Even though the new curriculum is

ready, the pilot phase was postponed until the 2009/2010 school year due to a shortage of

funding. Once tested and finalized, the new curriculum will need to be integrated into the

teacher training curriculum and in-service training program (p.43).

Leadership theories and professional development. These theoretical frameworks are

intended to theorize or make logical sense of the relationships among several factors that have

been identified as important to the problem of practice (Radhakrishna, Yoder & Ewing, (2007).

The theories of leadership and professional development provided insight into the link between

effective principals and effective schools and student outcome. One key way in which the

117

study’s findings were informed by the leadership and professional development theories is that

the theories shed light on the attributes and opportunities that were identified by the principals

and document review as important for effective principalship.

Leadership theories. The findings are consistent with the principals’ perceptions and

desire for improved leadership skills set. These perceptions and desire reflect the important

functions and challenges of principals. According to The Wallace Foundation (2011), which

funds projects aimed at improving principal leadership, effective school principals perform five

key functions: 1) shaping a vision of academic success for all students; 2) creating a climate

hospitable to education; 3) cultivating leadership in others; 4) improving instruction; and 5)

managing people, data and processes to foster school improvement.

In light of these functions, it’s understandable that the principals desire certain

preparation for their responsibilities. Many admitted that their jobs are challenging, and that the

right attitudes and dispositions are important leadership attributes for them to have. For example,

Principals H observed that the “principal [’s] job in Liberia is a hard job . . . you are expected to

solve all the problems.” The multiple school challenges that the principals face highlight the

difficulty of shaping a vision of student success, creating a healthy school environment and

improving instruction.

Professional development theory. The study’s findings raise serious issues about the

professional development of public school principals in post-war Liberia. Defined as in-service

training and workshops or an ongoing learning process in which educators engage to enhance

their professional practice (Diaz-Maggioli, 2003), professional development has a positive

impact on the performance of principals (Spillane, Healey, & Parise, 2009; Sultana, Hassain &

118

Ali, 2011). The findings showed a gap between the importance of professional development

opportunities for principals and the virtual lack of such opportunities in post-conflict Liberia.

Current research suggests that many school principals in developing countries are

inadequately prepared to cope with the complex issues pertaining to the management and

pedagogy of their schools. In terms of the availability of professional development opportunities

in developing countries, Williams and Cummings (2005) and (Khan, 2010) point out that

teachers are generally provided training, mostly at the start of their careers, but principals are far

less likely to receive training for their leadership responsibilities.

Discussion of Findings in Relation to the Literature Review

The findings of the study are related to the literature review in several ways. One main

way is that the literature review provided a guiding concept or topical focus for the study

(Rhoades, 2011); that is, it provided a focus for the relevant body of knowledge that had

previously been published on the specific topics reviewed in this work (Rhoades, 2011).

The findings’ relationship to the literature review is discussed in the following areas: 1) impact

of conflict on education; 2) leadership competency; and 3) principal leadership development.

Impact of conflict on education. The principals and the document review revealed the

terrible effects of the civil war on Liberia’s education system. One such effect was the

destruction of the education infrastructure. As the principals said, the lack of enough school

buildings and larger classrooms has led to overcrowding in public schools. Principal H described

classes as “simply over-crowded,” while Principal C called for “bigger classrooms to

accommodate . . . students.”

This finding is consistent with other studies on post-conflict societies. Studies have

documented that civil wars tend to destroy a nation’s education system and that schools and

119

educators are assets that cannot easily be replaced after the war (Lai & Thyne, 2007; Chen,

Loayza & Reynal-Querol, 2007). One study said:

The Liberian education system was shattered during the country's 14-year war, with the

destruction of schools, loss of staff, and disruption of children‘s education. Schools are

currently being built, and teachers trained and educational materials distributed, but

recovery is not keeping pace with public-school enrolment; between the 2005/2006 and

2008/9 school years, this saw a 48% increase, 33% of which was female. This increase in

enrolment was aided by the enforcement of the 2001 Education Act, which made primary

school education compulsory, and the 2006 abolition of school fees (UNICEF, 2011, p.

2).

As in Liberia, the carnage in Cambodia left the education system with almost no trained

or experienced teachers. More than two-thirds of the teachers in Rwanda’s primary and

secondary schools were killed or fled during the country’s civil war (World Bank, 2005).

Almost all secondary teachers in East Timor prior to its war of independence were Indonesians,

and their failure to return after the war left East Timor with virtually no trained or qualified

personnel for the secondary school system and no support for tertiary education. An estimated

95% of classrooms were either destroyed or seriously damaged during the Timorese war (World

Bank, 2005).

Principal leadership development. The literature review supports the findings regarding

the need for pre- and post-leadership training programs for Liberian public school principals. As

reported previously, only two of the 12 principals interviewed hold graduate degrees. Except for

these two principals, who took leadership courses in their graduate programs, the rest underwent

no prescribed or formal leadership education or training and hold no principalship licensure.

Bush (2003) asserts that it is widely acknowledged that principals need specific

preparation if they are to be successful in leading schools. In a similar vein, Mathibe (2007)

espouses that principals should be exposed to professional development programs to ensure that

120

schools are managed and led by well-qualified principals. These assertions relate to Principal E’s

underscoring of the need for principal training. She indicated that there is an “acute need for

refresher programs to keep principals up to date” with current developments and best practices in

education leadership and to allow principals to share ideas.

Principal I made a similar point regarding the general lack of personal professional

development initiative among Liberian public school principals: “Many of us principals . . . lead

by our experience or by heart,” which suggests a considerable leadership knowledge gap.

Professional development can enhance principal leadership by filling this gap (Newmann, King

& Youngs, 2000; Khan, 2010). This point is also supported by Mestry and Grobler (2004), who

stressed the necessity of providing principals with relevant skills, knowledge and attitudes

through a development and training program so that they can manage their schools effectively

and efficiently.

Leadership attributes. Another area where the research findings are strongly related to

the literature review is that of leadership attributes. The principals generally felt that successful

school leadership depends largely on the principal’s possession of a positive attitude, disposition

and certain critical attributes and skills. Principal A suggested that one way that principals can

portray a positive attitude and disposition is through punctuality, a value that many Liberians

find hard to uphold or practice.

This principal’s perception about the importance of punctuality was supported by the

literature review. Mestry and Grobler (2004), in their study of South African principals, noted

the need for principals to possess the ability to plan, schedule and control the work of others, to

use resources optimally, to deal with a large volume of paperwork and to meet the heavy

demands on one’s time. Another study conducted among 221 principals in Saudi Arabia—a

121

developing country like South Africa and Liberia--found that principals rated respect for time as

one of the most important features of effective principalship. In this study, the principals

indicated the need to show respect for other people’s time by being punctual at school and

functions (Zin, 2004).

One of the most common positive attributes shared by Liberian principals was a clear

commitment to work. In their words, this could be demonstrated in several ways: passion,

compassion, creative problem solving, good judgment, patience, monitoring and evaluation, and

ethical behavior. Principal D pointed out that principals should possess strong ethical values to

make good decisions in their practice. Principal F also regarded good judgment and ethical

disposition as vital principal attributes. He observed: “You got to be ethical as a principal and as

a role model who deals with these students every day.”

The literature is replete with well-documented body of knowledge on the instrumental

role played by morality in effective leadership. To emphasize the significance of ethical

leadership, Davis (2006) posits that “all leadership behavior is rooted in the soil of morality,” (p.

11). Campbell (1997) explains this point further: “educational literature increasingly emphasizes

the importance of ethics in educational leadership and the need to recognize professional

responsibilities as basic ethical imperatives” (p. 287). These statements from the literature review

are consistent with the findings of the study such as the flexibility fee and the exchange of

money for grades.

Final Researcher Commentary

My final commentary takes a further look at the implications of the data analysis from

two broad national perspectives: 1) education policy and reform; and 2) national socio-economic

and political development.

122

Education policy and reform. The data analysis has important implications for the

Liberian Ministry of Education’s efforts to reform public schooling. The major problems of low

student achievement, teacher absenteeism and lateness, exchange of sex and/or money for

grades, and inadequate principal training and support – all of which were identified in the data –

will likely, if not properly addressed, contribute toward the continued underperformance of

public education in Liberia and thereby impede any meaningful efforts to reform education.

Since Liberia conducted its first free democratic elections in 2005, the government has

instituted, through the Ministry of Education and with the assistance of various international and

national organizations, a variety of interventions aimed at rehabilitating and reforming public

education. Some of the major interventions that are being implemented with varying degrees of

success, include salary raises for school personnel, free and compulsory primary education,

accelerated learning programs, targeted education programs for girls, reviews of education

policy, teacher development, infrastructure expansion, provision of school materials, school

health and nutrition programs, early childhood education and scholarships (Education Sector

Plan of Liberia: 2010-2020, 2011).

One of the Ministry of Education’s main initiatives for education reform is the

decentralization of public education. In concert with the relevant partners, the Ministry is

working to decentralize educational control and decision-making in order to stimulate wider

community involvement, ownership and democracy in education. According to the

decentralization plan, education reform stands a better chance of succeeding if power and

decision-making are decentralized to the county, district and school levels.

The following assertion highlights the rationale of such a decentralization plan: “The

current [centralized] national system is marked by general inaction, fractured and variable

123

communication, and limited policy enactment or implementation” (National Education Policies:

2011, 2011, p. 4). Judging from this statement and realities in Liberia, it is clear that some of the

problems pointed out by the principals are not necessarily a result of the harsh economic

constraints facing the Liberian government, public school system, students, parents, school

personnel and communities; they are also the result of leadership, planning and implementation

failures.

It is difficult to imagine how decentralization can succeed if administrative and

leadership capacities are not built at the levels of the county, the district and especially the

school. The National Education Policies (2011) document recognizes this point: “Full

decentralization, theoretically, requires full capacity at these [county, district and school]

decentralized levels” (p. 2). The document further mentions that “for decentralization to schools

to be successful, principals must acquire new skills in leadership and management—including

financial management, teacher and personnel management, and community relations” (p. 6).

County education officers (CEOs) and district education officers (DEOs), both of whom are

critical to the success of education reform and decentralization, will need to be trained as well.

The literature is rich with evidence about the importance of and need for capable

principal leadership in education reform. Salazar (2007) notes that “for school reform efforts to

succeed, strong leadership must prevail and as such, principals must undergo professional

development that is aimed at helping them be more effective, knowledgeable, and qualified to

facilitate continuous improvement” (p. 21). Fullan (2007) acknowledges that “all major research

on innovation and school effectiveness shows that the principal strongly influences the likelihood

of change” (p. 95) and that “the principal is necessary for effective implementation” (p. 96). He

124

laments, however, that what “the principal should do specifically to manage change at the school

level is a complex affair for which the principal often has little preparation” (p. 96).

When decentralization policies are most fully implemented, the administrative capacity at

the local level either already exists or can be provided through training (Winkler, 1989). Never

before has there been in education a greater recognition of the need for ongoing professional

development programs for principals and teachers as a means to ensure school improvement

(Guskey & Huberman, 1995; Dembele & Lefoka, 2007; Zwiers, 2007; Lethoko, Heystek &

Maree, 2001).

National socio-economic and political development. The data analysis also has

significant implications for Liberia’s national development initiatives. These initiatives range

from the globally agreed-upon goals of Education for All (EFA) and Millennium Development

Goals (MDGs) to Liberia’s Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). Liberia has an EFA national

action plan that covers the years 2004 to 2015. This plan is rooted in the 1990 and 2000 World

Education Conferences (held respectively in Jomtien, Thailand and Dakar, Senegal) that agreed

on a set of global partnership arrangements and efforts for achieving the following goals: 1)

expanding early childhood care and education; 2) providing free and compulsory primary

education for all; 3) promoting learning and life skills for young people and adults; 4) increasing

adult literacy by 50%; 5) achieving gender equality in education by 2015; and 6) improving the

quality of education (“The eight millennium development goals,” 2012; Tilak, 2009).

The MDGs are eight global development goals that were formulated in the United States

in 2000 by United Nations world leaders as goals to be achieved by 2015 (“MDG Strategies, ” 2012;

Humphreys & Richard, 2005). MDG 2 and 3 – namely, achievement of universal primary

education for all children and elimination of gender disparity in education by 2015, respectively

125

– are derived from the EFA goals (Education Sector Plan of Liberia, 2010-2020). Liberia’s

Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) integrates several objectives, including the goals of EFA and

the MDGs. The PRS is a comprehensive rehabilitation and development program designed by

Liberia and its international partners to put the country on a sustainable course by focusing on

four fundamental pillars: 1) security, 2) economic revitalization, 3) governance and rule of law

and 4) infrastructure and basic services (Education Sector Plan of Liberia, 2010-2020).

Liberia’s Education Sector Plan rightfully recognizes that “Education can conveniently fit

into all four pillars” (p. 18) mentioned above. It is hard to envision how Liberia can successfully

achieve the EFA, MDG, PRS and other national development goals without an effective public

education system. The positive effects of education and national development have been well

documented (Chapman, Mahlck & Smulders, 1997; Nwomonoh, 1998; Harber, 1997). As

Phillips and Schweisfurth (2008) and USAID (2001) indicate, education is a key social

institution that can affect the values and behaviors of individuals, shape a nation’s future citizens

and workforce, and impact national development. Investment in the education of a people can

increase the overall economic productivity of their nation because education instills the

necessary skills, knowledge and motivations for economic productivity, which will provide a rate

of return for both the individual and society (Phillips & Schweisfurth, 2008; Gyimah-Brempong,

2011; Thakrar, Zinn, & Wolfenden, 2009; World Bank, 1988).

Odularu and Olowookere (2010) emphasize the importance to education to socio-

economic and political development in this way:

Education is a sine qua non component of development which reduces the twin burdens

of poverty and diseases. An effective way of generating economic growth is through

educational development. In other words, the basic importance of education is to enable

individuals with knowledge and the ability to apply that knowledge. Education is

therefore commonly regarded as the most direct avenue to rescue a substantial number of

126

people out of poverty since there is likely to be more employment opportunities and

higher wages for skilled workers. Education at all levels contributes to economic growth

through imparting discipline and specific skills necessary for a variety of workplaces. It

contributes to economic growth by improving health, reducing fertility and possibly by

contributing to political stability. Furthermore, education can enable children’s attitudes

and assist them to grow up with social values that are more beneficial to the nation and

themselves (p. 85).

It is equally hard to see how Liberia’s public education system can become effective

enough to contribute to the nation’s development efforts without well-trained principals who, as

Dufour, Dufour, and Eaker (2008) point out, perform the leadership role of defining the school’s

mission, supervising and evaluating the instructional program, coordinating the curriculum,

monitoring student progress, and promoting a positive learning climate.

School leadership can be made more effective if the Ministry of Education can develop

transformational principals who would emphasize “the ingredients of change—ideas,

innovations, influence, and consideration for the individual in the process” (Marks & Printy,

2003, p. 391). Transformational principals also emphasize individual initiatives, shared goals,

vision, intellectual stimulation, culture building, rewards, high expectation and modeling

(Hallinger, 2003; Ylimaki, 2007), in addition to inspiring and exciting their followers to high

levels of performance or empowering their followers to achieve extraordinary results (Hallinger,

2003; Nohria & Khurana, 2010; Ylimaki, 2007). Prioritizing the leadership development of

public school principals in Liberia is particularly critical, given that principals in developing

countries have generally been found to take totalitarian approaches to leadership (Oplatka, 2004).

Oplatka (2004) writes that although there is no single description of school principals in

developing countries, studies have revealed some common characteristics, such as limited

autonomy, autocratic leadership style, summative evaluation, low degree of initiating change and

lack of instructional leadership functions. Principals in Kenya and Tanzania tend to be promoted

127

without specific preparation, receive little or no induction, have limited access to suitable in-

service training, and enjoy little support from the educational bureaucracy (Abdalla, Onguko, &

Webber, 2008).

In addition to the need for professional development, the other problems that the

principals cited – inadequate educational supplies and materials, overcrowded classrooms and

lack of overall administrative support – demand attention in any effort to improve the

effectiveness of public education. These problems are not unique to post-conflict Liberia,

though. A UNESCO study of the effect of civil wars on education from 1980 to 1997 found that

civil wars are likely to reduce educational expenditures and enrollment across all levels of

schooling, to destroy a state’s infrastructure, including school facilities, to reduce foreign

investment and tourism, and to cause a loss of human productivity as a result of death and injury

(Lai & Thyne, 2007).

The success of Liberia’s development efforts in crucial national areas, such as physical

infrastructure, agriculture, health, economic growth, global trade and foreign policy, is related to

effective education reform and student achievement. Key indicators of Liberia’s socio-economic

progress are understandably lagging behind many other African countries. For example, Liberia

falls at the low rank of 182 out of 187 countries, according to the United Nations 2011 Human

Development Index. Liberia is amongst the poorest countries in the world, with a 2011 Gross

National Income of US$ 396 per capita. The IMF, World Bank and other creditors have

approved a package of US$4.6 billion under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative,

reducing external debt to about 15% of GDP (UNDP 2010 Report, 2011).

Liberia’s continued socio-economic and political development would hinge largely on

education, which is capable of accelerating economic growth, increasing wealth and income

128

distribution, improving equality opportunity, increasing the availability of skilled human power,

reducing population growth, and enhancing national unity and political stability (Nwomonoh,

1998; Gyimah-Brempong, Paddison & Mitiku, 2006).

Conclusion

The data analysis shows that public school principals in Liberia face a wide range of

problems. These include (but are not limited to) a lack of adequate and sustainable opportunities

for professional leadership development, the misconduct of students, absenteeism and lateness

on the part of teachers, an inadequate pool of qualified teachers, overcrowded classrooms, an

inadequate supply of instructional materials, low student achievement, limited parental

involvement in school activities, trading of sex and money for passing grades, and inadequate

supervisory support from higher education officials.

These complex and multifaceted problems confront public school principals at a time

when principals are increasingly being expected to provide effective school leadership. Mestry

and Singh (2007) make this point succinctly: “Expectations of principals have moved from

demands of management and control to the demands of an educational leader who can foster

staff development, parent involvement, community support, and learner growth” (p. 477).

It is important to note that the Liberian government has made tremendous strides in

raising the salaries of school personnel. The government of Liberia, in its second major salary

raise of civil servants (including teachers and administrators) since coming to power in 2006,

announced in September 2011 a significant increase in the salaries of its workers (The New

Dawn Newspaper, 2011). For the first time in Liberia’s educational history, public school

teachers and principals now earn more income than their private school counterparts.

Nevertheless, financial constraints remain a major problem affecting public education in post-

129

conflict Liberia, and other problematic areas identified by the principals also need to be

addressed. One way to do this is to provide opportunities and support for the development or

enhancement of the leadership competencies of public school principals.

Proper training and adequate supporting for principals is a major prerequisite for school

effectiveness and student achievement. Development opportunities that provide principals with

needed knowledge, skills, values and attitudes are vital, particularly as changing educational

demands become increasingly difficult to meet (Mestry & Singh, 2007). This is especially true

for the Liberian public school system because it experiences the problems of student indiscipline,

teacher absenteeism and lateness, overcrowded classrooms, limited educational materials and

supplies, sex and money trading for undeserved passing grades and low student academic

performance. The World Bank captures the post-conflict predicament well: “The legacy of

conflict imposes significant additional burdens on education . . . accumulated backlogs in

physical infrastructure, supplies and equipment, policy and system development, teacher

development and training, and overage children” (World Bank, 2005, p. 26).

Well-prepared and supported principals would be an important asset to the Liberian

government as it attempts to decentralize the hierarchical educational bureaucracy to the county,

district and school levels. Most importantly, without effective principals and effective schools,

Liberia’s socio-economic and political development goals, such as EFA, MDG and PRS, will

suffer. As studies have shown, education plays a critical role in the wider reconstruction of a

society. This role ranges from fostering peace and social cohesion to facilitating economic

recovery and moving the country forward (World Bank, 2005; Phillips & Schweisfurth, 2008;

Staeheli & Hammett, 2009).

130

References

American Association of School Administrators (1988). Challenges for school leaders.

Arlington, VA: Author.

Angucia, M. (2009). Children and war in Africa: The crisis continues in Northern Uganda.

International Journal on World Peace, 26(3), 77-95.

Ann, M. & DeJordy, R. (2010). Leadership through an organization behavior lens: A look at the

last half-century research. In Nohria, N. & Khurana, R. (eds.) Handbook of leadership

theory and practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education. Belmont,

CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Athanasoula-Reppa, A. & Lazaridou, A. (2008). Requirements, roles, and challenges of the

principalship in Greece and Cyprus. European Education, 40(3), 65-88.

Bagin, D., Gallagher, D. R. & Moore, E. H. (2008). The school and community relations (9

ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Barnett, D. (2004). School leadership preparation problems: Are they preparing tomorrow’s

leaders? Education, 125(1), 121-129.

Barnett, B. G. & Mahony, G. R. (2006). Developing a culture of reflection: Implications for

school improvement. Reflective Practice, 7(4), 499-523.

Barth, R. S. (1986). Principal centered professional development. Theory Into Practice, 25(3),

156-160.

Barth, R., S. (1987). The principal and the profession of teaching. In William Greenfield (ed.),

Instructional leadership: Concepts, issues, and controversies (pp. 249-270). Newton,

MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Bennis, W. & Goldsmith, J. (2003). Learning to lead: A workbook on becoming a leader (3

ed.). Park Avenue South, NY: Basic Books.

Best, J. W. & Kahn, J. V. (1993). Research in education (7

ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn

& Bacon.

Blanchard, K., Hersey, P. & Johnson, D. (2001). Management of organizational behavior--

Leading human resources (8

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Business

Publishing.

131

Bloom, G., Castagna, C. & Warren, B. (2003). More than mentors: Principal coaching.

Leadership, 32(5), 20-23.

Botha, R. J. (2004). Excellence in leadership: Demands on the professional school principal.

South African Journal of Education, 24(3), 239-243.

Bratton, J., Grint, K. & Nelson, D. (2005). Organizational leadership. Mason, OH: South-

Western.

Buor, F. (2001). Ethnonationa tensions in Liberian education, 1944-1996 (Doctoral dissertation,

Loyola University of Chicago). Available at ProQuest Dissertation & Theses database

(AAT 3015503)

Burke, W. (2008). Organization change theory and practice (2

ed.). Los Angeles: Sage

Publications.

Bush, T. (2003). Series editor’s forward. Brundrett, M., Burton, N., Smith, R. (eds.), Leadership

in education (pp. ix-x). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Bush, T. (2008). Theories of educational leadership and management (3

ed.). London: SAGA

Publishing Ltd.

Campbell, E. (1997). Ethical school leadership: Problems of an elusive role. Journal of School

Leadership, 7(3), 287-300.

Catano, N. & Stronge, J. H. (2007). What do we expect of school principals? Consequences

between principal evaluation and performance standards. International Journal of

Leadership in Education, 10(94), 379-399.

Chapman, D., W., Mahlck, L., O. & Smulders, A., E., M. (1997). From planning to action:

Government initiative for improving school-level practice. Paris, France: Imprimerie

Louis Jean.

Chapman, J. D. (2005). Recruitment, retention and development of school principals. The

International Institute for Educational Planning & The International Academy of

Education. Paris, France & Brussels, Belgium.

Chung-Herrera, B.G., Enz, C.A., & Lankau, M.J. (2003). Grooming future hospitality leaders: A

competencies model. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 44(3), 17-

25.

Clawson, J. (2006). Level three leadership: Getting below the surface (3

ed.). Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Pearson Practice Hall.

132

Cliff, R.T., Houston, W.R., & Pugach, M.C. (Eds.). (1990). Encouraging reflective practice in

education: An analysis of issues and programs. New York: Teachers College Press.

Collins, D. (1998). Achieving your vision of professional development. Tallahassee, FL:

Southeastern Regional Vision for Education.

Cowie, M. & Crawford, M. (2007). Principal preparation: Still an act of faith? School Leadership

and Management, 27(2), 129-146.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (3

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Crowl, T. K. (1993). Fundamentals of educational research. Dubuque, IA: WCB Brown &

Benchmark.

Daft, R. L. (2010). Management (9

ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

D’Abate, C. P. D. & Eddy, E. R. (2008). Mentoring as a learning tool: Enhancing the

effectiveness of an undergraduate business mentoring program. Mentoring and Tutoring:

Partnership in Learning, 16(4), 363-378.

Dall’Alba, G. & Sanberg, J. (2006). Unveiling professional development: A critical review of

stage models. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 383-412.

Daresh, J. C. & Playko, M. A. (1992). The professional development of school administrators:

Preservice, induction and inservice applications. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and

Bacon.

Davies, B. (2004). Building a civic culture post-conflict. London Review of Education, 2(3), 229-

244.

Davies, L. (2005). Schools and war: urgent agendas for comparative and international education.

Compare, 35(4), 357-371.

Davis, E., E. (2006). Qualities for effective leadership: School leaders speak. Lanham, MD:

Rowman and Littlefield Education.

Dembele, M. & Lefoka, P. (2007). Pedagogical renewal for quality universal primary education:

Overview of trends in Sub-Saharan Africa. International Review of Education, 53(5-6)

531–553.

Diaz-Maggioli, G. H. (2003). Professional development for language teachers. Eric Digest.

Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/digest_pdfs/0303diaz.pdf

133

Dillon, E. (2007). The role of education in the rise and fall of Americo-Liberians in Liberia, West

Africa (1980) (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University). Retrieved from

http://digitalarchive.gsu.edu/eps_diss/18

Dinham, S. (2004). Principal leadership for outstanding educational outcomes. Journal of

Educational Administration, 43(4), 338-356.

Doyle, M. (2004). Call to help Liberia's child soldiers. The British Broadcasting Corporation

(BBC). Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3450263.stm

Dufour, R., Dufour, R. & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at

work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Dunn-Marcos, R., Kollehlon, K., Ngovo, B. & Russ, E. (2005). Liberians: An introduction to

their history and culture. Cultural Orientation Resource Center for Applied: Washington,

DC.

Engels, N., Hotton, G., Devos, G., Bouckenooghe, D., & Aelterman, A. (2008). Principals in

schools with a positive school culture. Educational Studies, 34(3), 159-174.

Evans, P., & Mohr, N. (1999). Professional development for principals. Seven core beliefs. Phi

Delta Kappan, 80(7), 530-533.

Fenwick, L. & Pierce, M. (2002). Professional development of principals. ERIC Digest,

ED477731. Retrieved February 8, 2009 from http://www.ericdigest.org/2004-

1/principals.htm.

Ferraro, J. M. (2000). Reflective practice and professional development. ERIC Digest

ED449120. Retrieved June 24, 2009 from http://searcheric.org/digests/ed449120.html

Fullan, M. (2002). Leadership and sustainability. Principal Leadership, 3(4), 1-9.

Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Columbia

University Teachers College Press.

Gay, L. R. (1996). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (5

ed.).

Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Gay, L. R. & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and

application (6

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Government of Liberia (2003). National action plan, 2004-2015. Monrovia, Liberia: Author.

Grinnell, R. M. & Unrau, Y. A. (2008). Social work research and evaluation: Foundations of

evidence-based practice (8

ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.

134

Guskey, T. & Huberman, M. (1995). Professional development in education: New paradigms &

practices. New York, NY: Columbia University Teachers College Press.

Gyimah-Brempong, K. (2011). Education and economic development in Africa. African

Development Review, 23(2), 219-236.

Gyimah-Brempong, K., Paddison, O., & Mitiku, W. (2006). Higher education and economic

growth in Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 42 (3), 509-529.

Habegger, S. (2008). The principal’s role in successful school: Creating a positive school culture.

Retrieved December 4, 2010 from http://www.naesp.org/resources/1/Principal/2008/S-

O_p42.pdf

Hale, E. L. & Moore, H. N. (2003). Preparing school principals: A national perspective on policy

and program innovations. Institute for Educational Leadership. Washington, DC.

Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: reflections on the practice of instructional and

transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-351.

Harber, C. (1997). Education, democracy and political development in Africa. Chichester Place,

Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.

Harper, R. E., Jr. (2008). An investigation into the professional development needs of urban

principals and their perceptions of the potential of online professional development

(Doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati). Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/

send-pdf.cgi/HARPER%20ROBERT%20E.%20Jr.pdf?ucin1212161808

Hope, W., Respress, T. & Zame, M. (2008). Educational reform in Ghana: The leadership

challenge. International Journal of Educational Management, 22(2), 115-128.

Huge, M. (1989). Reflective-in-action & reflective-on-Action. A paper presented at the annual

meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, CA, March

27-31.

Humphreys, M., & Richards, P. (2005). Prospects and opportunities for achieving the MDGs in

post-conflict countries: A case study of Sierra Leone and Liberia. Retrieved August 7,

2012 from http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/HR.pdf

Hyman, L. (2003). United States policy towards Liberia: 1822 to 2003: Unintended

consequences? Cherry Hill, NJ: African Homestead Legacy Publishing.

Importance of a good literature review. (2012). Retrieved July 24, 2012 from

http://libguides.usc.edu/content.php?pid=83009&sid=615851

135

International Rescue Committee (2002). Leveraging learning: Revitalizing education in post-

conflict Liberia. Retrieved from http://www.ineesite.org/uploads/documents/store/

doc_1_Leveraging_Learning_-_IRC_Liberia_Education.pdf

Johnson-Sirleaf, Ellen. A public conversation with President Ruth Simmons. Honorary Program

for Liberian President Johnson-Sirleaf. Providence, RI 19 September 2008.

Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118

(2), 282-192.

Kafka, J. (2009). The principalship in historical perspective. Peabody Journal of Education, 84,

318-330. doi: 10.1080/01619560902973506

Kamper, G. (2008). A profile of effective leadership in some South African high-poverty

schools. South African Journal of Education, 28(18), 1-18.

Khan, A. (2010). A case study exploring perceived professional development needs for

secondary school principals in Pakistan. University of Pittsburgh). ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from http://ilsprod.lib.neu.edu/docview/

858078934?accountid=12826. (858078934).

Kottkemp, R. & Osterman, K. (1993). Reflective practice for educators—Improving schooling

through professional development. Newbury Part, California: Corwin Press, Inc.

Krathwohl, D. R. (1993). Methods of educational and social science research: An integrated

approach. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge (4

ed.). San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass

Lamptey, G. (1990). Public subsidization of nonpublic schools and the development of education

in Liberia (Doctoral dissertation). Available at ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Database.

(AAT 9033869).

LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Preparing and supporting

principals for effective leadership: Early findings from Stanford’s school leadership

study. Retrieved September 29, 2012 from http://seli.stanford.edu/research/

documents/sls_early_findings.pdf

Leithwood, K., Seashore-Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership

influences student learning (Learning From Leadership Project Executive Summary).

New York: The Wallace Foundation.

136

Lethoko, M., X., Heystek, J. & Maree, J., G. (2001). The role of the principal, teachers and

students in restoring the culture of learning, teaching and service (COLT) in black

secondary schools in the Pretoria region. South African Journal of Education, 21(4), 311-

317.

Li, K. (2007). UNICEF. Minister of Education urges international support for recovery in post-

conflict Liberia. Retrieved September 28, 2008 from http://www.unicef.org/

infobycountry/Liberia_38362.html

Liberia Government & United Nations. Millennium Development Goals Report 2004. Retrieved

September 5, 2008 from http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Liberia/

Liberia_MDGR_2004.pdf

Liberia Institute of Statistics & Geo-Information Services (LISGIS) (2009). National Population

& Housing Census. Retrieved from http://www.emansion.gov.lr/doc/

Population_by_County.pdf

Liberian youths report on injustices of education system in Liberia. (2010). Retrieved August 13,

2010 from http://www.unicef.org/policyanalysis/liberia_52380.html

Light, R. J., Singer, J. D. & Willett, J. B. (1990). By design: planning research on higher

education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Lunenbury, F. & Ornstein, A. (1996). Educational administration: Concepts and practices (2

ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Lynch, J. M. (2012). Responsibilities of today's principal: Implications for principal preparation

programs and principal certification policies. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 31(2),

40-47.

Macione, N. (2009). Paraprofessionals and professional development: An approach based on

principles of adult learning (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses database. (AAT 3367444).

Mann, M. (1998). Professional development for educational leaders (PREL Briefing Paper ED

1.310/2:415588). Washington, DC.

Mansfield, R.S. (1996). Building competency models: Approaches for HR professionals. Human

Resource Management, 35(1), 7-18.

Marks, H. M. & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An

integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.

137

Markus, L. H., Cooper-Thomas, H. D. & Allpress, K. N. (2005). Confounded by competencies?

An evaluation of the evolution and use of competency models. New Zealand Journal of

Psychology, 34(2), 117-126.

Mathibe, I. (2007). The professional development of school principals. South African Journal of

Education, 27(3), 523-540.

Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2

ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (6th

ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

MDG Strategies. (2012). Retrieved October 1, 2012 from http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/

home/ourwork/povertyreduction/focus_areas/focus_mdg_strategies/

Mendenhall, M., Osland, J., Bird, A., Oddou, G. & Maznevski, M. (2008). Global leadership:

Research, practice & development. Madison Avenue, NY: Routledge.

Mestry, R. & Grobler, B. R. (2004). The training and development of principals to manage

schools effectively using the competence approach. International Studies in Educational

Administration, 32(3), 2-19.

Mestry, R. & Singh, P. (2007). Continuing professional development for principals: A South

African perspective. South African Journal of Education, 27(3), 477-490.

Metcalf, J. (1974). From economic growth to total development: A strategy for Liberia.

International Labour Review, 109(2), 119-135.

Ministry of Education (2008). 2008 Annual Report. Monrovia, Liberia: Author.

Ministry of Education Census Report (2008). A system in transition. Monrovia, Liberia: Author.

Ministry of Education (n. d.). Education For All (EFA), 2004-2015. Monrovia, Liberia: Author.

Ministry of Education (2000). Liberia Education Sector Master, 2000-2015. Monrovia, Liberia:

Author.

Ministry of Education (n. d.). The Education Sector Plan of Liberia, 2010-2020. Monrovia,

Liberia: Author.

Ministry of Education (2011). National Education Policies, 2011. Monrovia, Liberia: Author.

138

Monrovia Consolidated School Project. (1970). Retrieved October 18, 2011 from

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtS

earch_SearchValue_0=ED053068&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED0530

New Dawn Independent (2011). MOF Effects Salary Increment. Retrieved October 27, 2011from

http://www.thenewdawnliberia.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4

313:finance-ministry-effects-salary-increment&catid=25:politics&Itemid=59

Newmann, F. M., King, M. B. & Youngs, P. (2000). American Journal of Education, 108(4),

259-299.

Newstrom, J. & Pierce, J. (2006). Leaders & The leadership process—Readings self-assessments

& applications (4

ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Ngunia, S., Sleegers, P. & Denessen, E. (2006). Transformational and transactional leadership

effects on teachers’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational,

citizenship behavior in primary schools: The Tanzanian case. School Effectiveness and

School Improvement, 17(2), 145-177.

Nohria, N. & Khurana, R. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of leadership theory and practice. Boston,

MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.

Noonan, S. (2003). The elements of leadership: What you should know. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow

Press.

Nwomonoh, J. (1998). Education and development in Africa: A contemporary survey. Bethesda,

MD: International Scholars Publications.

Odularu, G. O. & Olowookere, R. (2010). Education and economic performance: Lessons from

West Africa. Journal of Economics and International Finance, 2(5), 85-94.

Onguko, B., Abdalla, M. & Webber, C. (2008). Mapping principal preparation in Kenya and

Tanzania. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(6), 715-726.

Oplatka, I. (2004). The principalship in developing countries: Context, characteristics & reality.

Comparative Education, 40(3), 427-448.

Otunga, R. N., Serem, D. K., & Kindiki, J. N. (2008). School leadership development in Africa.

In J. Lumby, G. Crow, & P. Pashiaris (Eds.), International Handbook on the Preparation

and Development of School Leaders (pp. 367-382). Madison Avenue, NY: Routledge.

Patten, M. L. (2005). Understanding research methods: An overview of the essential (5

ed.).

Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.

139

Paulson, J. (2009). Recreating education in postconflict contexts: Transitional justice, Education,

and human development. Retrieved from http://www.ictj.org/en/research/projects/

research5/thematic-studies/3254.html

Paulson, J. & Rappleye, J. (2007). Education and conflict: Essay review. International Journal of

Education Development, 27, 340-347.

Phillips, D., & Schweisfurth, M. (2008). Comparative and international education: An

introduction to theory, method and practice. York Road, London: Continuum Liberia

No More War. (2005). Retrieved September 26, 2010 from http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/

stories/liberia/facts.html

Radhakrishna, R. B., Yoder, E. P., Ewing, J. C. (2007). Strategies for linking theoretical

framework and research types. Proceedings of the 2007 AAAE Research Conference:

Vol. 34. Retrieved from http://aged.caf.wvu.edu/Research/NAERC-2007/

PosterAbstracts/692-Radhakrishna_etal.pdf

Ramalho, E. M., Garza, E. & Merchant, M. (2010). Successful school leadership in socio-

economically challenging contexts: school principals creating and sustaining successful

school improvement. International Studies in Educational Administration, 38(3), 35-56.

Rammer, R. (2007). Call to action for superintendents: Change the way you hire principals. The

Journal of Educational Research, 101(2), 67-76.

Rhoades, E., A. (2011). Literature Reviews. The Volta Review, (111)3, 353-368.

Salazar, P. (2007). The professional development needs of rural high school principals: A seven-

state study. The Rural Educator, 28(3), 20-27.

Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as a qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education

and the social sciences (2

ed.). New York, NY: Columbia Teachers College Press.

Sendolo, J. (2010, August 12). Liberia: Liberia’s participation in WAEC exams postponed. NGO

News Africa. Retrieved from http://ngonewsafrica.org/archives/2296

Shah, S., M., Sultana, N., Hassain, K., S., & Ali, I (2011). Impact of professional development

on the performance of secondary school principals: A managerial perspective.

International Journal of Management, 28(4), 92-105.

Shannon, G.S. & Bylsma, P. (2007). The nine characteristics of high-performing schools: A

research-based resource for schools and districts to assist with improving student

learning. (2nd Ed.). Olympia, WA: OSPI.

140

Short, P. & Greer, J. (2002). Leadership in empowered school: Themes from innovative efforts

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY: Merrill, Prentice, & Hall.

Sinnott, G. C., Madison, G. H., & Pataki, G. E. (2002). Competencies: Report of the

competencies workgroup, Workforce and Succession Planning Work Groups. New York:

New York State Governor's Office of Employee Relations and the Department of Civil

Service.

Sirleaf, A. (2003). The role of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in the

Liberian civil war conflict 1980-1997: A case study of conflict management. Washington,

DC: Communicators Press.

Siyan Chen, S., Loayza, N. V. & Reynal-Querol, M. (2007). The aftermath of civil war. The

World Bank Economic Review, 22(1), 63–85.

Smith, A. (2005). Education in the twenty-first century: Conflict, reconstruction and

reconciliation. Compare, 35(4), 373-391.

Sparks, D. & Hirsh, S. (1997). A new vision for staff development. Oxford, OH: ASCD.

Sperling, G. B. (2001). Toward universal education: Making a promise, and keeping it. Foreign

Affairs, 80(5), 7-13.

Spillane, J. P., Healey, K., & Parise, L.M. (2009). School leaders' opportunities to learn: A

descriptive analysis from a distributed perspective. Educational Review, 61(4), 407-432.

Staeheli, L. A. & Hammett, D. (2010). Educating the new national citizen: education, political

subjectivity and divided societies. Citizenship Studies, 14(6), 667-680.

Thakrar, J., Zinn, D. & Wolfenden, F. (2009). Harnessing open educational resources to the

challenges of teacher education in Sub-Saharan Africa. International Review of Research

in Open and Distance Learning, 10(4), 1-15.

The eight millennium development goals. (2012). Retrieved October 1, 2012 from

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-

agenda/education-for-all/education-and-the-mdgs/

The Wallace Foundation (2012). The school principal as leader: Guiding schools to better

teaching and learning. New York, NY: Author.

Tilak, J. B. G. (2009). Basic education and development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of

International Cooperation in Education, 12(1), 5-17.

Thyne, C. (2006). ABC’s, 123’s and the golden rule: The pacifying effect of education on civil

war, 1980-1999. International Studies Quarterly, 50, 733-754.

141

Thyne, C. and Lai, B. (2007). The effect of civil war on education, 1980-97. Journal of Peace

Research, 44(3), 277-292.

Uitto, D. (2006, January 12). School leadership that works: From research to results. [Review of

the book School leadership that works: From research to results by R. J. Marzano, T.

Walters & B. A. McNulty]. Teacher College Record. Retrieved December 14, 2010 from

http://www.tcrecord.org/PrintContent.asp?ContentID=12290.

UNDP (2008). Liberia’s progress toward the millennium development goals. Retrieved April 6,

2010 from http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Liberia/Liberia-MDG-report-2008-

small.pdf

UNDP & Government of Liberia (2010). Millennium Development Goals 2010. Retrieved

September 28, 2012 from http://www.lr.undp.org/Documents/RecentPublic/

MDG%20Report%20_Final.pdf

UNDP (2011). Human development report 2011: Sustainability and equity. New York, NY:

Author.

UNDP (2011). Millennium development goals(2010 Report). Retrieved October 24, 2011 from

http://www.beta.undp.org/undp/en/home.html

UNESCO (2011). The six education for all goals. Retrieved October 24, 2011 from

http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=42579&URL_DO=

DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

UNESCO & IIEP (2011). Education and fragility in Liberia. Retrieved August 23, 2012 from

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002121/212197e.pdf

UNICEF (2011). Progress evaluation of the UNICEF education in emergencies and post-crisis

transition programme (EEPCT): Liberia case study. New York, NY: Author.

University of Southern California Libraries (August, 2012). Organizing your social sciences

research paper. Retrieved August 12, 2012 from: http://libguides.usc.edu/

content.php?pid=83009&sid=618409

USAID (2001). Basic education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Retrieved August 7, 2012 from

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDACN848.pdf

USAID (2009). Liberia youth fragility assessment (2009). Retrieved July 15, 2010 from

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADQ258.pdf

Walker, A. & Dimmock, C. (2006). Preparing leaders, preparing learners: The Hong Kong

experience. School Leadership and Management, 26(2), 125-147.

142

Williams, G. H. (2002). Liberia: The heart of darkness—account of Liberia’s civil war and its

destabilizing effects in West Africa. Victoria, B.C., Canada: Trafford Publishing.

Williams, J. H., & Cummings, W. K. (2005). Policy making for education reform in developing

countries: Volume I. contexts and processes. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Winkler, D. (1989). Decentralization in Education: An economic perspective. Washington, DC:

World Bank.

World Bank (1988). Education in Sub-Saharan Africa: Policies for adjustment, revitalization,

and expansion. Washington, DC: Author.

World Bank (2010). Liberia education country status report. Retrieved July 23, 2012 from

http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Full_Report_1985.pdf

World Bank (2005). Reshaping the future: Education and post-conflict reconstruction.

Washington, DC: Author.

Ylimaki, R. M. (2007). Instructional Leadership in Challenging US Schools. International

Studies in Educational Administration, 35(3), 11-19.

Zimmerman, J. A., & May, J. J. (2003). Providing effective professional development: What’s

holding us back? American Secondary Education, 31(2), 37-48.

Zin, R. B. (2004, April). Conceptualization of effective leadership: A case of Brunei

Darussalam. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Administrative

Sciences: Meeting the challenges of globalization, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Retrieved

from http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/coe/sadiq/proceedings/SCAC2004/

02.ASC007.EN.MatZin.Conceptualization%20of%20Effective%20Leade%20_1_.pdf

Zwiers, J. (2007). Professional development for active learning in Sub-Saharan Africa:

Reflectively practicing a community-centered approach. Journal of Education for

International Development, 3(1), 1-15.

143

Appendix A: Letter of Recruitment

144

Appendix B: IRB Letter of Consent

145

Appendix C: Interview Protocol

Interview Introduction

Good morning (afternoon) and thank you for granting me this interview. Again, my name is

Zobong Norman.

Informed Consent Form

Let’s start with the informed consent form. I would like you to take a few minutes to read this

form (hand form to principal). Please ask any question (s) you may have. After that, both of us

will sign two identical consent forms. I will take one copy and the other copy will remain with

you.

Now that we have covered information about my institutional affiliation and the purpose of my

study in the informed consent form, let’s talk about the interview. The interview has two parts.

The first part involves me asking you some questions, which might take 60 to 90 minutes or

longer. I will ask follow-up questions to make sure that I understand your answer or to get more

detail or to clarify a point or question. The questions are aimed at understanding your

experiences as a principal and your thoughts about your leadership preparation and in-service

support needs. The second part is a short survey containing six questions about your background

to get an insight into the diversity of the principals in the study. It would take about three

minutes to answer the survey questions.

I would like for you to feel very comfortable with saying what you really think and how you

really feel. Your answers will remain confidential and your identity anonymous. There is no right

or wrong answer and desirable or undesirable answer. If you feel that you are not in a position to

answer any question or questions for any reason, you should simply tell me so.

Tape Recorder

I will be tape-recording our conversation. The purpose of this is to record the interview

accurately and at the same time be able to engage in an attentive conversation with you. I assure

you again that all your comments will be kept strictly confidential and that anyone who reads the

thesis will know your identity. I will create a file on the electronic recorder for each interview

before I arrive for the interview. I will ensure that new battery (ies) is put into the recorder for

each interview. At the start, the middle and the end of an interview, I will check or observe the

recorder to make sure that it is functioning properly.

Identity Coding

To ensure anonymity, the 12 principals will be disguised by assigning codes to them. The codes

are numbers 1 to 12. The numbers will be assigned in the order in which the interviews are

conducted (i.e., the first principal to be interviewed will be principal number 1 and the last will

146

be principal number 12). The number will be recorded in the box next to interviewee identity.

There will be 12 interview protocol forms, one for each principal. The date of each interview and

the time the interview starts and ends will be recorded. The electronic files will be named by the

corresponding codes or numbers of the principals (i.e., the first and second files will carry the

names Principal.1 and Principal.2, respectively.

Interviewee Identity Interview Start Time----------------

Interview End Time-------------- Interview Date-----------------------

Electronic File Number (same as principal’s number) -------------------------

Interview Conclusion

At the end of an interview, the principal will be asked if she/he has any further comment

regarding the issues covered during the interview. Following this, I will thank the principal for

agreeing to participate in the study and for the interview opportunity. I will then offer the

principal a token of appreciation in the amount of US $15.00.

Interview Questions

Many of the questions below are very much related. Any question that is answered in a previous

response will be skipped. As much as possible, there will be minimum interruptions of the

principals as they narrate their stories and experiences. Interruptions will be necessary to ask

follow-up questions and to refocus the issues of the interviews.

1. How did your workday go or is going?

2. Tell me something about yourself.

3. How and why did you get into education?

4. Walk me through the journey of how you got to the position of principal?

5. How does your typical day look like as principal?

6. What are the responsibilities as a school principal?

7. What are the main problems you face with students, teachers, or parents at school, or community

as a principal?

8. Tell me about programs or opportunities that are available to prepare or help principals to run

their schools well.

147

9. What do you think the Ministry of Education could do to help principals to do their jobs?

10. Tell me about visits that officials of the Ministry of Education or the County Education Officer

makes to your school and what do they do or say, and what do you tell them?

11. What do you think about leadership development programs or ongoing in-service training to

sharpen the leadership skills of principals?

12. What could be the contents of such programs and how could they be structured to create a

balance in the activities of principals?

13. What other experiences have you had in the field of education or another field?

148

Appendix D: Modified Interview Protocol

Interview Introduction

Good morning (afternoon) and thank you for granting me this interview. Again, my name is

Zobong Norman.

Informed Consent Form

Let’s start with the informed consent form. I would like you to take a few minutes to read this

form (hand form to principal). Please ask any question (s) you may have. After that, I will take

one copy and the other copy will remain with you.