STANDARDS OF PERSONALITY & PRACTICES IN HIGH-PERFORMING EDUCATIONAL LEADERS

Institut Aminuddin Baki Ministry of Education Malaysia

By EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH DEPARTMENT (ERDD) INSTITUT AMINUDDIN BAKI GENTING HIGHLANDS BRANCH

Published by: Publication Unit INSTITUT AMINUDDIN BAKI Ministry of Education Malaysia Kompleks Pendidikan Nilai 71760 BANDAR ENSTEK Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus Tel: 06-7979 200 Faks: 06-7079 300 www.iab.edu.my Copyright @ 2020 Institut Aminuddin Baki Institut Aminuddin Baki Main Campus, Bandar Enstek, 71760 Nilai, Negeri Sembilan All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purpose of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher or a license from the Copyright Licensing Agency Limited. Details of such licenses for reproduction may be obtained from the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd. MyIpo.

Publication Managers: Nik Karimah binti Nik Hassan Meriam binti Allias Graphic Design and Layout: Nurasyikin Binti Mat Printed by: Perniagaan Normahs No. 3, 4 dan 5, Jalan 12/10 Taman Koperasi Polis Fasa 1 68100 MUKIM BATU Kuala Lumpur Phone: 0361875904 / 61888940 / 61869863 Handphone: 01123747413 / 0192633114 Faksimili: 03-61870954 E-mail: [email protected]

ii

STANDARDS OF PERSONALITY & PRACTICES IN HIGH-PERFORMING EDUCATIONAL LEADERS Patron Hon. Dato’ Haji Tajuddin bin Mohd Yunus, Ph.D Director Institut Aminuddin Baki Haji Abd. Razak bin Manaf, Ph.D Seniour Deputy Director (Professional Services) Institut Aminuddin Baki Datuk Haji Mohd Kassim bin Haji Mohd Ibrahim, Ph.D Seniour Deputy Director (Training Services) Institut Aminuddin Baki Advisors Haji Abd. Razak bin Manaf, Ph.D Seniour Deputy Director (Professional Services) Institut Aminuddin Baki Datuk Haji Mohd Kassim bin Haji Mohd Ibrahim, Ph.D Seniour Deputy Director (Training Services) Institut Aminuddin Baki Ekerim a/p Din, Ed.D Head of The Department of Publication and Documentation Institut Aminuddin Baki Zainuren bin Haji Mohd Nor Director IAB Genting Highlands Branch Authors Abdul Wahab bin Muda, Ph.D Hajjah Nor Hasimah binti Hashim @ Abd. Manaf Jamelaa Bibi binti Abdullah, Ph.D Nakoo bin Mustan, Ph.D Hamidon bin Abdul Rahman, Ph.D Nazeri bin Mohamad, Ph.D Editors Hajjah Nor Hasimah binti Hashim @ Abd. Manaf Meriam binti Allias

iii

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xi ABOUT THE BOOK vi-viii

Acknowledgements

Foreword

1

Chapter 1 Introduction and Background of the Standards

Background

Literature Review on Standards of Personality and Practices in HighPerforming Educational Leaders

3 Process of Developing High Performing Educational Leadership Standards Based on Personality and Practice

1-15

Chapter 2

xii

17 The Concept of High-Performing Educational Leader

32 Summary on the Standards of Personality and Practices Of HighPerforming Educational Leaders

17-34

Chapter 3 The Personality in the HighPerforming Educational Leaders

35-56

35

56

The Concept of High-Performing Educational Leaders’ Personality

Conclusions High-Performing Educational Leaders’ Personality

iv

vi-ix - List of Tables - List of Figures - List of Diagrammes - ABBREVIATIONS

14 Conclusions

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

57

Chapter 4 The Practices in the HighPerforming Educational Leaders

57-65

The Concept of Practices in the High-Performing Educational Leaders

Chapter 5

65 Conclusions on the High-Performing Educational Leaders’ Practices

67

68

71

85

Applicability of the The Applicability of Summary and Standards of The Standards of Recommendations Personality and Personality Practices for Using the Practices in High- in the High-Performing Standard Personality Performing Educational and in Educational Leader High-Performing Leaders Educational in Malaysia Leader

67-70

APPENDICES 71-118

References

v

Standards of Personality and Practices in HighPerforming Educational Leader’s Self-Rating Instrument

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Table 1.2

ITEMS Draft of the criteria of high-performing leaders competencies Indicators and items representing the practice and personality domain The Findings of the Development Phase for Practice and Personality Domain

Page 5-6 8 - 10

Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5

The Reliability of the Personality and Practices Domains and Its Indicators

13

The Details of Research Questions, Data Collection Techniques and Analysis of Findings

14 - 15

Table 2.1:

The Contents of the Malaysian School Principals Competency Standards (MSPCS)

vi

11 - 12

28

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1: Figure 1.2:

ITEMS The Conceptual Framework adapted from Ridhuan (2017)

Page 4

Figure 2.4:

The Design and Development Phase using Fuzzy Delphi Method and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). The Domains in the new Malaysian Education Quality Standards Wave 2 (MEQSWave2)

Figure 2.5:

Behavioural Change Model by Prochaska and DiClimente (1983)

33

Figure 5.1:

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Indigenous Model

70

vii

10 30

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

LIST OF DIAGRAMMES Diagramme 2.1:

ITEMS Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (2015)

Diagramme 2.2:

Australian Professional Standard for Principals (2015)

22

Diagramme 2.3:

The Content of the Integrated Assessment of the Educational Services Officials (IAESO)

27

viii

Page 19

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

ABBREVIATIONS

MEDP

: Malaysian Education Development Plan

MSPCS

: Malaysian School Principalship Competency Standards

MEQSWave2 : Malaysian Education Quality Standards Wave 2 FDM

: Fuzzy Delphi Method

EFA

: Exploratory Factor Analysis

IAESO

: Integrated Assessment of the Educational Services Officials

DEO

: District Education Office

SED

: State Education Department

HEI

: Higher-Education Institutions

NGO

: Non-Governmental Organisations

PTA

: Parent Teacher Association

HPEL

: High-Performing Educational Leadership

PSEL

: Professional Standards for Educational Leader

ISLLC

: Interstate School Leader Licensure Consortium Standards

AITSL

: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership

TS25

: School Transformational Plan (2025)

ix

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

Foreword

Director Institut Aminuddin Baki

Bismillahhirrahmannirrahim. Assalamu’alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. The publication of the Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders book is an ardent effort of Institut Aminuddin Baki (IAB) in documenting its research findings and disseminating them for the benefit of all educators. In as much, it is our contention that the publication of this book would be utilised by academicians, researchers, leaders in the world of education to assess their own leadership performances against the standards as aspired by the Malaysian Educational Development Plan (MEDP 2013-2025). This book also served as guidelines in the school administration and management. It is our hope that the publication of the Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders book will not only be a platform for sharing

knowledge corpus and practices among educational leaders and practitioners but also serve as guidelines for the implementation of the development programme in IAB. We believe that the findings from these research will help raise the quality of our delivery in the aforementioned discipline and add value to our programmes in line with the six functions of IAB as the centre for training, consultation, research, publication, assessment and think tank.

Finally, I wish to convey my heartiest congratulations to the Director of IABCGH, Deputy Director of IABCGH and all the members of the research team who have contributed whole-heartedly and tirelessly in the research and making the publication of Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders book a success.

HON. DATO’ Dr. HAJI TAJUDDIN BIN MOHD YUNUS DIRECTOR INSTITUT AMINUDDIN BAKI MINISTRY OF EDUCATION MALAYSIA xi

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS All praise be to Allah the Al-Mighty Creator that with His blessings and perfections the publication of the Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders book has finally been completed and published. Alhamdulillah, we are indeed grateful for His Grace, we have managed to complete the book successfully. We wish to extend our deepest appreciation to the top Management of IABCGH for their believe and trust in the Department of Educational Research and Development in conducting the research at the national level in line with the motto “One Branch, One Research,” that is the Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders. The book is being translated into other languages to disseminate the findings of the research amongst the academicians, practitioners and educational leaders far and wide. We are indebted to all our research team who have shown their full commitment and greatest support in seeing through the book till the end, especially to Dr. Abdul Wahab bin Muda, the Head of Department of Educational Research and Development Department, Dr. Hamidon bin Abdul Rahman, Dr. Nakoo bin Mustan, Hajjah Nor Hasimah binti Hashim, Dr. Jamelaa Bibi binti Abdullah and Dr. Nazeri Bin Mohammad. We would also like to extend our appreciation to other team members Dr. Wee Eng Lee, Dr. Kamaruzaman bin Moidunny, Mr. Abdul Razak bin Alias, Mr. Muhammad Khalil bin Yahaya and proofreaders team Dr. Lim Siew Hui, Dr. Teh Kim Peng, Miss Wong Kwai Cheng and Meriam binti Allias for their collaboration and contribution of ideas. We wish to extend our thanks to the State Education Department and the District Education of Malaysia, Principals and Headteachers, Middle Leaders and teachers who have given their full support in the data collection and in making this book possible. We hope that all your good deeds are acknowledged by Allah s.w.t. We also wish to thank all lecturers in IABCGH for your continued support for us to move on. We hope that all our efforts in sharing the knowledge corpus is an investment in itself for us and blessed by Allah s.w.t in the thereafter.

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument xii

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

xii i

CHAPTER 1

BACKGROUND The Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 is an education development plan that outlined 11 shifts to produce the desired change for all Malaysians. The 5th shift in particular is to ensure that high-performing leadership is placed in each school. Based on the need to improve leadership competencies for the nation's education system, the ministry has devised an array of transformations blueprint, namely the Malaysian Education Development Plan (2013-2025) to be implemented in three (3) waves with several initiatives aimed at ensuring high-performing leaders emplaced in Malaysian schools. However, since the completion of the first wave of initiatives, the question on the percentage of such leaders being successfully trained and the measurement of what makes such a leader remains unanswered. The Fifth Shift of the Malaysian Blueprint, namely the Malaysian Education Development Plan (MEDP), which is to be realised by 2025, was assigned to the Institut Aminuddin Baki (IAB), the principal organisation in Malaysia set up in 1979 specifically to train the nation’s educational leaders. Yet, after four decades, there are uncertainties if it has achieved its objective of training prospective and current leaders to become high performers in their own organisations to achieve the level of high-performing educational leaders? If so, how do we measure it? The studies conducted in Malaysia, thus far, generally only examine Principals' and Headteachers’ practices in high performance schools rather than examining high-performing leadership. The results of the literature review revealed that existing studies, especially that of Jamilah and Yusof Boon (2011) merely looked at leadership practices at high-performing schools and transformational-leadership-based model development (Leithwood, et al., 1

CHAPTER 1 - Introduction

INTRODUCTION

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

2003, 2007). On a similar note, the study by Rosnah Ishak, Muhammad Faizal, and Saedah (2014) focused on the practice of organisational learning leadership in highperforming schools in Malaysia. Additionally, Sufean (2014) made comparisons of school culture and instructional leadership in high-performing and low-performing schools while Zanariah Aziz Omar, Kamaruzaman Jusoff, Sharina Tajul Urus, Salina Salleh, and Zarinah Abdul Rasit (2011), had reviewed leadership performances among primary schools in Malaysia. Meanwhile, recent research by Yahya Don, Yaakob Daud, Abd Latif Kasim, Zuraidah Juliana, and Siti Noor Ismail (2016) found that high-potential leadership at school was influenced by emotional competence and situational leadership which consisted the elements of intrapersonal, interpersonal, stress management, adaptation and general feelings. The studies listed above indicate that the focus which is more focused on principals' practice in high performance schools which does not exhibit a standard practice.

High-performing

school’s

entails

diversified

situational

leadership

characteristics. However, does this indicate that high performance school’s leader is highperforming educational leader as well? According to Blasé, Blasé and Philips (2010), there are seven elements of high-performing educational leader: (1) Learning; (2) RoleModelling; (3) Staying Focused; (4) Leading for Achievement; (5) Improving teaching; (6) Developing Instructional Leadership; and (7) Teaching and Learning (Instructional Leadership). Delaney (2016) observed that there are eight (8) elements or characteristics of a high-performing educational leader: (1) Possessed positive attitude combined with energy; (2) Courageous and Confidence; (3) Disciplined; (4) Reflective; (5) Patient; (6) Resilient; (7) Visionary; and (8) Trustworthy. Based on the studies along with scholars’ opinions on high-performing leaders, Principals’ and Headteachers’ practices in high performance schools does not fulfill the criteria of high-performing educational leadership standard (HPEL) entirely. Therefore, a study should be carried out to elicit the actual criteria of a high-performing principal or headmaster. The literature review had indicated that there is no single standard that can measure the criteria of high-performing educational leaders. In this regard, research has 2 2

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

to be carried out to develop a HPEL standard in order to be used as a guide for measuring high performance educational leaders in accordance with the Malaysia's standards.

PROCESS OF DEVELOPING HIGH-PERFORMING EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP STANDARDS BASED ON PERSONALITY DAN PRACTICE According to Cavaleri (2008), in order to produce a standard or model, consideration must be given to the context and requirements of the organization to reflect a practice, that is in line with the needs of the organisation. To create a standard that can gauge highperforming educational leaders uniformly, hence this research employed Design Development Research (DDR) method. In so doing, Richey and Klien (2007) stated that there are three (3) main phases involved: the need-analysis phase; the design and development phase and the evaluation phase. Although this study is using type II which entails only two or three phases but in order to demonstrate the perfection of DDR, hence reference was made upon Tracey's (2002) who had conducted her study in four phases namely the need-analysis phase using literature review followed by the design phase using Delphi; the development phase and evaluation phase to secure model application effectiveness . By and large, this study demonstrated the perfection of DDR (Tracey, 2002), involving four phases of DDR in five steps. The first step – meta analysis through literature review; second step - need-analysis phase; third step - design phase; fourth step - development phase and the fifth step - evaluation phase. The conceptual framework was shown in Figure 1.1.

3 3

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

Developing High-Performing Educational Leader’s Standards Among Principals’ and Headteachers’ Practices In Malaysia High Performing Educational Leaders (Preliminary Criteria - Literature Review)

High-performing Educational leader’s criteria

Effective Leader Standards

Blasé.J, Blasé.J & Philips.D.Y (2010), Delaney.L (2009),

•

• 1.Leading Professional Development Programs 2.Role Models, 3.Establishing Relationships And Networks, 4.Developing School Systemic Systems, 5.Trusting Subordinates , 6.Data-Based Decision Making., 7.Focus On Teaching And Learning, 8.Create A Positive Culture, 9.Continually Improve Schools And Use Effective 10.Communication Methods And 11.Personal, Social And Interpersonal Skills

• •

National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2015), Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2015) SKPMg2 (2016) (MSPCS (2012)

Design and Development Approach (Richey & Klien, 2007)

Interview

Phase 1 - NeedsAnalysis - Primary Performance

1.6 METODOLOGI KAJIAN Fuzzy Delphi

Phase 2 – Design and Development Phase

Rasch Modelling, SEM (CFA)

Phase 3 – Evaluation Phase

EFA(SPSS),

PRACTICE 1. Clear Direction 2. Empowering Teachers 3. Networking and Linkages 4. School Culture and Climate 5. Learning Leaders 6. Leading and Managing Changes

PERSONALITY 1. Self-confidence 2. Emotional stability 3. Organizational Awareness 4. Communication 5. Challenging Status Quo 6. Conceptual Thinking 7. Proactive 8. Change Catalyst 9. Team leadership 10. Drive Creativity and Innovation 11. Coaching and mentoring 12. Optimising Relationships 13. Motivator 14. Believe 15. Courage 16. Initiative

Figure 1.1: The Conceptual Framework adapted from Ridhuan (2017)

4

STANDARDS OF PERSONALITY AND PRACTICES IN HIGHPERFORMING EDUCATIONAL LEADERS IN MALAYSIA

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

STEP ONE: META-ANALYSIS The meta-analysis begins with a literature review that was divided into two main elements: namely operational definition of high-performing educational leader in reference to Blasé, J, Blasé. J & Philips, D.Y (2010) and Delaney, L (2009) as well as domains and indicators in existing standards of the National Policy Board For Educational Administration (2015), Australian Institute For Teaching And School Leadership (2015) and Malaysian Education Quality Standard Wave 2 (MEQSw2, 2018). The conclusions drawn from this analysis had produced a preliminary criteria draft of high-performing educational leaders as shown in Table 1.1 which consisted the construct of leading professional development programmes, role models, establishing relationships and networks, developing school systemic systems, trusting subordinates, data-based decision making, focus on teaching and learning, create a positive culture, continually improve schools and use effective communication methods and possess personal, social and interpersonal skills. Table 1.1: Draft of the Criteria of High-Performance Leaders No 1.

Construct

Leading Professional Development Programs

2.

Role Models

3.

Establishing Relationships and Networks

4.

i.

ii. iii. iv. i.

Elements Developing self and other Learning Knowledge and understanding Curiosity Role model

Linkages i. Cooperation With Teachers to Improve Teaching ii. Professional capacity of school personnel iii. Professional community for teachers and staff iv. Appreciation for teachers v. Collaboration with schools vi. Give and take/ win-win situation Networkings i. Meaningful Engagement of Families and Community ii. Engaging and working with the community iii. Building and maintaining collaborative relationships iv. Community of care and support for students v. International cooperation i. Stay focused ii. Purposeful

5

5

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

Developing School Systemic Systems

iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii.

5. 6.

Trusting Subordinates Data-Based Decision Making

7.

Focus On Teaching And Learning

8.

Create A Positive Culture

9.

Continually Improve Schools

10.

Use Effective Communication Methods

11.

Possess Personal, Social and Interpersonal Skills

ix. x. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. i.

Imaginative Operations and management Vision and values Living a mission and vision focused on results Solving complex thinking problem and critical problems Curiosity and imaginative Leading the management of the school Mission, vision and core values Appointing strong individuals, Challenging the status quo Dialogue Take action based on the procedures and circulars Empowerment

i.

Accessing and analysing information ii. Results based on the findings / facts / data iii. Setting goals based on data. i. Curriculum, instruction and assessment ii. Leading teaching and learning iii. Improving teaching and learning iv. Setting Teaching Goals i. Equity and cultural responsiveness ii. Creating and sustaining a culture of high expectations iii. Conducive school climate i. Leading improvement, innovation and change ii. Leading and managing systems change iii. Creativity iv. Innovation v. Data-based improvements Effective oral and written communication Spiritual quotient (sq), emotional quotient (eq) and adversity quotient (aq) i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. x.

2C - courage and confident Discipline Have patience Have perseverance Ethics and professional norms Leading with integrity and professionalism Positive attitude is combined with energy Initiative Entrepreneurship Quick action and adaptation

6 6

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

A literature review was conducted by 10 researchers using local and foreign sources. A total of 11 constructs were discussed in detail to draw consensus from each researcher. The agreed-upon criteria draft was used as a guide to the interview thereafter.

SECOND STEP: NEED-ANALYSIS PHASE The next step is the need-analysis phase, data were collected through interviews among high-performing educational leaders (Principals and Headteachers) and the data were analyzed using Nvivo data analysis software. The aim is to discover to what extent the main performance of the school leaders in pursuing high-performing educational leadership and is it in line with the views of scholars delineated in the literature review? This was consistent with the view of Limbrey, Meikle and Berggren (2012), whom argued that the primary performance of leadership in an organization needs to be identified before setting a standard for educational high-performing educational leader. This is to avoid the standards that were set being difficult to adhere by Principals and Headteachers of in Malaysia schools in the future. Thus, the need-analysis was carried out in selected schools in Malaysia in the form of exploration to identify key performance leadership based on the criteria established through interviews and observations. The outcome of the exploration was built upon the views of four selected high-performing Principals whom had showcased remarkable Malaysian Education Quality Standards (MEQS, 2010) composite score and outstanding school turnaround performance in a district. During this phase, eight Seniour Assistants, eight teachers and eight School Improvement Partner (SIP+) / District Education Officers (PPD) / State Education Department Officers (JPN) also provided feedback. A total of 32 respondents were involved in this step altogether.

7 7

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

STEP THREE: DESIGN PHASE The third step in this study is the design phase which is the most important phase through using Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) for the creation and construction of the domain, constructs as well as key elements for each indicator. According to Hsu and Brian, (2007) the Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) is an approach that has been widely used and adopted in collecting data for a study based on the agreement of an expert group regarding on an issue being studied. The strength of this method had drawn diversification of techniques in obtaining empirical data. FDM is a modified measurement method based on the Delphi method. This method was introduced by Kaufman and Gupta in 1988. FDM is a combination of the fuzzy numbering set and the Delphi method itself (Murray, Pipino, & Vangigch, 1985). For the HPEL standard design phase analysis, a total of 100 experts were selected using purposive sampling method. The experts consist of high-performing educational leaders (HPEL) Ministry of Education (MOE) Officers and Seniour Assistants with high expertise in respective fields. A total of 370 items across 22 indicators representing the practice domain (166 items) and personality (204 items) were developed in the form of HPEL questionnaires as shown in Table 1.2. Table 1.2: Indicators and Items Representing the Practice and Personality Domain

CONSTRUCT

NO. ORIGINAL ITEMS

1st Condition Proposed Number of Items Removed (d Value Threshold >0.2)

2nd Condition Proposed Number of Items Removed (expert agreement NOT ACHIEVE 75%)

3rd Condition Items (a - cut off value THRESHOLD >0.5)

No. Nett ITEM

A2.11, A3.1, A4.4

> 0.5

25

B1.3

> 0.5

24

PRACTICE Clear Direction

28

Empowering Teachers

25

A3.1

8 8

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

Networking and Linkages School Culture and Climate Learning Leaders Leading And Managing Changes TOTAL

C2.6, C2.8, C2.9

C1.11, C1.13, C1.15, C1.16

> 0.5

40

13

D1.6

> 0.5

12

40

E2.26

> 0.5

39

F1.1, F1.2, F1.3, F1.5, F1.8, F1.11, F1.14, F1.16

> 0.5

8

NONE

148 item

> 0.5

9

> 0.5

18

I1.1, I1.3 I1.5, I2.1 I3.1, I4.1

> 0.5

7

J1.4, J2.5, J2.6, J2.7, J2.8, J2.10, J2.11

> 0.5

14

5

K1.5

> 0.5

4

10

0

> 0.5

10

M1.3, M4.1

> 0.5

9

44

16

F1.8

166 items

18 items

PERSONALITY Selfconfidence Emotional stability

22

Organizational Awareness

13

Communication

21

Challenging Status Quo Conceptual Thinking

G3.1, G3.2,G3.3, G4.1, G4.3, G5.1 H1.3, H1.4, H2.3, H2.4

15

J2.11

M2.2, M4.1

Proactive

11

Change Catalyst

13

0

> 0.5

13

Team leadership

25

O1.1, O1.2, O5.4, O6.1, O6.2, O6.4

> 0.5

19

13

P1.1

> 0.5

12

19

Q1.1, Q1.2

> 0.5

17

Utilising Relationships

6

0

> 0.5

6

Motivator

18

S1.3, S1.4, S2.1, S2.2, S2.7, S2.8

> 0.5

12

Drive Creativity and Innovation Coaching and mentoring

9

9

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

Believe

5

T1.4, T1.5

> 0.5

3

Courage

4

0

> 0.5

4

Initiative

4

V1.4

> 0.5

3

NONE

160 items

TOTAL

V1.4

204 items

44 items

STEP FOUR: DEVELOPMENT PHASE The fourth step, the standard development phase, was carried out as soon as the design phase was completed. As shown in Figure 1.2, this stage involved Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA).

HPEL

HPEL

Figure 1.2: The Design and Development Phase using Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). In this phase, each element from the Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) was further developed using the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) approach. The questionnaire was modified to test the validity or the quality of the data obtained from the instrument to ensure 10

10

Standards of Personality and Practices in High-Performing Educational Leaders Self Assessment Instrument

it measures what should be measured (Mohd Ghani et al. 2008, 2009 and Pandiyan Cozby, et. al., 2009). The construct validity was examined to determine it measure the actual value of what is desired. According to Chua (2006), the validity test is employed to see the correlation in the measurement of a variable with the actual value of the variable. The questionnaire was further refined after Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) to ensure the construct validity of these items actually represent the constructs that were studied. The EFA was conducted to obtain items with sound factor loadings. According to Pallant (2007), the desirable factor loading should be more than 0.3 and less than 0.9, with Bartlett's test of Sphericity significant at the p