1. Principals transforming schools as caring leaders C P van der Vyver North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus South Africa

2. Introduction School leadership has an effect on learner output & performance The management/leadership style of the principal determines the climate in the school and influences the educator’s experience of the quality of his/her working life and working environment. "It makes sense that if employees believe their managers care about them, then organizational benefits will result (Kroth & Keeler, 2012) “Teachers and students alike work better when they are cared about” (Day, 2004) "Caring may improve teaching outcomes, and hence be a competency worth developing for pedagogical reasons. Caring may help leaders produce better outcomes, and hence be a competency that leadership courses might put forward" (Kroth & Keeler, 2012).

3. Problem & Rationale Research about caring has been significant in at least two disciplines, nursing and education (caring for students). It has received less attention in management and leadership literature. A lack of care in schools contributes to the following: Declining levels of effectiveness in the organisation A lack of commitment A decline in performance of educators Negative organisational relationships which further contributes to a negative school climate. Poor academic performance of learners Withhold care from others The school leader thus has a duty to care for and to care about teachers. No clear guidelines for school leaders on how to optimise their caring leadership

4. Research Aims The research pivoted on the question whether South African school principals fulfilled their caring role towards teachers? The purpose of this research was to determine the principal’s perceptions of psychological care given to educators and to compare it to the level of psychological care experienced by educators. A second aim was to develop a management strategy for optimising psychological aspects of care in school leadership.

5. Conceptual-theoretical framework  Caring school leadership defined: The school principals‘ concern about the wellbeing of the educator, which manifetsts in sympathy, empathy and a commitment to the educator. This concern further includes the provision in physical, personal, social, emotional and self-actualising needs of the educator. Caring leadership closely relates to leadership styles and theories that regard the people in the organisation as important. Transformational leadership include individual support, organisational values, intellectual stimulation and participatory decision making. Moral leadership which is based on moral authority in the sense of shared values, ideas and ideals Servant leadership the leader accepts the role of encourager and supporter

6. Conceptual-theoretical framework Determinants of caring leadership A review of the caring literature from nursing, education, management and leadership. Instruments: CDI (Caring Dimensions Inventory) of Watson & Lea (1997) The Servant Leadership Behaviour Scale (Sendjaya et al., 2008) Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument (SLAI) Patterson (2003) Models: The Watson caring model (Rexroth & Davidhizar:2003) The care model for teacher training programmes (Smith & Emigh, 2006) The care model of Tronto (Fine:2007) The care model of Beck (Beck:1992)

7. Conceptual-theoretical framework Determinants of care in principal leadership

8. Study Population & Sample A systematic stratified cluster sample of 83 schools with more than 15 teachers each was drawn from the total population of n= 1377 schools. All the principals (n=83) and teachers were invited to participate in the survey. The sample can be regarded as representative of the entire North West Province. Seventy two of the 83 schools responded to the questionnaires (86.7%); 65 principals and 1041 teachers participated in the survey.

9. Research Methodology Non experimental design embedded in the post positivistic paradigm: Survey Research Structured questionnaire – Caring School leadership Questionnaire (CSLQ)Four point Likert scale with 59 items of which 26 specifically addressed psychological aspects Cronbach alpha coefficients varied between 0.83 and 0.98. Since the values were larger than 0.7, the questionnaire could be regarded as reliable. A factor analysis confirmed validity (3 factors = 3 determinants of care) Calculation of the practical significance (effect size – d-value where d = 0.8 indicates a large effect)

10. Results

11. Principals’ vs. teachers’ ratings of care Determinant of care RespondentsMSDp-valued-value Psychological Principals (N=65) Teachers(N=1041) 3.5 3.0 0.27 0.4 <0.0001 1.20*** Workplace/ Organisational Principals Teachers 3.6 3.2 0.3 0.4 <0.0001 1.12*** Management Principals Teachers 3.7 3.1 0.26 0.4 <0.0001 1.41***

12. Items that contributed most towards a positive rating of care by the teachers Rank Item No Item My principal…… MSDResponse Not at all (%) To a small extent (%) To some extent (%) To a large extent (%) 1B52 Shares successes with teachers 3.340.81149.635.151.3 2B29 Sees to a school safety policy 3.320.7953.21136.349.4 2B32 Limits school vandalism 3.320.7672.99.639.547.9 4B30 Sees to it that buildings are kept in a good condition 3.310.8173.91135.749.4 5B61 Commits to the vision and mission of the school 3.30.8213.41334.149.6 6B54 Demonstrates self-confidence to lead 3.290.8424.51234.549.3 7B28 Maintains healthy school discipline 3.260.8123.41337.645.8 8B15 Respects us 3.240.81641239.544.4 9B27 Provides a safe working environment 3.230.83341437.344.9 10B42 Works towards the benefit of the whole school community 3.220.8314.21338.644

13. Items that contributed least towards a positive rating of care by the teachers Rank Item No Item My principal…… MSDResponse Not at all (%) To a small extent (%) To some extent (%) To a large extent (%) 1B2 Understands my feelings 2.950.8667.41846.927.5 1B13 Is interested in my experiences 2.950.876.82044.728.8 3B63 Supports me personally 2.930.9279.71842.829.9 4B4 Imagines him/ her in my situation 2.930.9279.71742.830.1 4B6 Is conscious of others’ feelings 2.930.8416.42048.125.8 4B10 Sees my ideas as important 2.930.8396.62048.825.1 7B44 Empowers me through participative decision-making 2.920.8887.82043.928 8B58 Makes an effort to defend me 2.910.90391844.827.8 8B19 Protects my self-interest 2.890.8516.8224724.6 10B8 Takes an interest in my personal life 2.690.938132541.720.3

14. Findings To determine how principals rated their care-giving: Principals rated their care giving very high To determine whether significant discrepancies existed between principals’ rating of their care-giving and teachers’ experiences thereof: Significant discrepancies existed between principals rating and teachers’ experiences. (very large d values) To identify the determinants of care that contributed the most and the least towards principals care-giving and teacher’s ratings thereof. Contributing most was workplace/organisational determinants Contributing least was psychological determinants.

15. Towards a strategy Emotional intelligence of principals Strategy – Addressing emotional intelligence as part of the PGP Principals not addressing emotional/psychological needs of educators Strategy – Establishing a wellness program at the school Honest relationships, build on moral values Strategy – To identify the common and core values in the school and develop a school specific code of conduct (For management and educators), based on these values.

16. Recommendations Education/Training Determinants of care and specific psychological care could be addressed in specific training programmes eg. ADE or PGDipl in School leadership. Short courses for principal training, could adress psychological determinants of caring leadership. Training opportunities for principals, specifically with regard to the development of emotional intelligence. School level With the appointment of principals, the SGB could take into account the results of personality evaluations. If personality evaluations shows specific development areas, the principal should receive guidance. Principals should annually do a self evaluation, to determine if they adress their caring role with regard to educators optimally.

17. Recommendations School level With the appointment of principals, the SGB could take into account the results of personality evaluations. If personality evaluations shows specific development areas, the principal should receive guidance or psycotherapy. Principals annually do a self evaluation, to determine if they adress their caring role with regard to educators optimally. Principals annually undergo a 180 o -evaluation to determine if they adress their caring role with regard to educators optimally.

18. Future research The relation between caring leadership and school effectiveness/ success in diverse contexts.