Classroom Leadership Theory

3.1 Summary of the Theoretical Considerations

Recent study on educational leadership has pointed consistently to leadership styles as one of the critical goals of higher education and a yardstick for measuring its efficiency (Rafiq & Mehmood, 2010). Quality of higher education is considered if the leadership styles of heads and teachers are powerful and motivational (Davies et al; 2001) that behaviors contribute to subsequent student learning and development of organization (Lok & Crawford, 2004), including the behaviors they develop (Cummings & Worley, 2014) and the quality they make (Trivellas & Dargenidou, 2009). Behavioral theories of leadership were governing in the 1990s. There are number of examples as PGT (path-goal theory) (House

To gain the organization’s objectives they sacrifice their personal life matters and promise to challenging goals. By giving clarification for the special effect some leaders have on professional engagement, team leadership, professional leadership behaviors, classroom leadership, steering the behavior of students, interpersonal skills and professional attitude, the theories seem to make an important influence to our understanding of leadership procedures. The newer theorists explain many positive sides of leadership styles but there are observed some conceptual weaknesses. The theoretical flaws in TL theory are studied first, followed by an examination of theoretical faults in charismatic leadership; situational leadership and democratic leadership theory. The researchers found the similar flaws as were mentioned in earlier styles, and they comprise unclear hypotheses, inadequate explanation of descriptive procedures, a little focus on dyadic procedures, exclusion of some significant actions, inadequate description of restraining circumstances (situational variables), and a partiality concerning heroic ideas of leadership. Throughout the study the authors suggestions for refining the styles and point out extra investigation that is required to assess

They explain TL effect on team members, and the behavior used to attain this effect. The subordinates feel faith, respect, faithfulness, and esteem toward the leader, and they are interested to do more than they initially expected to do. Transformational leaders inject motivation and exceed their personal-interest for the achievement of organization goals. Review of literature provides a big difference between transformational leadership and transactional leadership, which include an exchange procedure to inspire team members, consent with leader wishes and association rules. Transformational leadership explains different behaviors which the researchers measured with survey method and the recent version of (Bass, 1996; Bass & Avolio, 1990) presents the same concepts as: (1) regular feedback, (2) encouragement to team members, (3) calculated risk, (4) vision for future, and (5) reward to colleagues. Some studies prove that positive reward behavior of TL is more effective instead of the transactional behavior. There are several survey studies which prove that transformational leadership is positively related to team leadership and professional engagement (Bass, 1998). Another way to define leader effect on groups is in terms of the short-term influences of a leader’s behavior on arbitrating variables related to task presentation, such as stimulation of reasons, improved self-potency or