Georgia Teachers Perceptions of Principals Interpersonal Commun-16-148

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Educational literature is replete concerning communication skills as a necessity

for school leaders (Hall, 2000). Effective principals, as detailed by the National

Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP), must demonstrate competency in

all areas of communication, especially those of interpersonal communication skills.

NAESP further iterates that principals influence teachers’ instruction through supervision

and practices that require effective interpersonal communication skills.

The premise that principals have an impact on the school remains constant in

educational history (Heck & Hallinger, 1999). For example, many studies throughout the

years concerning school reform have identified the principal as a key player in the

success of the school (Fullan 1985, 1991, Leithwood, 1992, Prestine, 1994, Day, 2000,

and Sergiovani, 2000). Mackey (2006) explains that the principal influences the learning

environment by articulating the vision and mission of the school. He argues that this

plays a very important factor in teacher and student success since the vision and mission

gives purpose and direction. Furthermore, Mackey reveals that the principal as an

instructional leader influences teaching and learning by supporting researched based

methods and using data to improve the curriculum or instructional strategies. Bogler

(2002) reports that principals, who view teachers as intellectuals, allow opportunities for

self-development, share decision-making and collaborative power make an impact on

teaching and learning by creating a positive school climate.

The No Child Left Behind Act is a law of accountability (U. S. Department of

Education, 2003). Its goal is to have all students proficient in Math and Reading by

2014. Principals will need to improve teaching and learning by supporting and inspiring

their staff in order to accomplish this goal (Herman & Diesel, 2005). Research

demonstrates the correlation between student academic achievement and teacher quality

(Heck & Hallinger, 1999). In addition, Dietel reports that school climate must be

conducive to meeting NCLB goals that is facilitated by strong interpersonal

communication skills of the principal.

Before the 1980s, there were very few empirical studies conducted to study the

effects of school leadership. There was a growing concern as to whether principals were

making a difference in student achievement (Glassman & Heck, 1992). The phrase

“effective schools” as it relates to effective principals will be used in the context of

correlates for effective schools. Edmonds (1979a; 1979b; 1981) first devised five

correlates for effective schools: (a) the leadership of the principal is characterized by

substantial attention to the quality of instruction; (b) there is a pervasive and broadly

understood instructional focus; (c) an orderly safe climate exists; (d) teachers’ behavior

convey the expectation that all students are to possess at least minimum mastery; and (e)

pupil achievement is used as the measure for program evaluation. Edmonds explained

that each ingredient is directly related to the other. They are interactive, and they all are

present in an effective school. Gauthier (1982) and Villanover (1984) sharpened the

focus of the original five correlates by devising seven correlates: clearly stated and

focused mission; high expectation for students, teachers, and administrators; safe and

orderly climate for learning; instructional leadership by all administrators and staff

members; opportunity to learn and time-on-task; frequent monitoring of student progress;

and positive home/school relations. These correlates are now utilized in several school

reform initiatives such as Phi Delta Kappa’s National Center for Effective Schools, the

California Center for Effective Schools, the Association for Effective Schools, and the

National Alliance for Effective Schools” (Garrison, 2005).

The key to effective schools is an effective principal (Fullan, 2002). Fullan

further argues that the effective principal’s role is critical to the success of any

improvement efforts of the school. Halawah (2005) discussed characteristics that play a

role in being an effective principal. Subordinates do not fear the effective principal; they

respect the principal. An effective principal has knowledge of how humans learn.

According to Halawah, this allows the principal to enhance an effective instruction

program. Effective communication is another of the characteristics that Halawah

discussed. He argued that effective communication plays a crucial role in the success of

school principals. Effective principal must keep open communications with teachers and

staff in order to foster positive school climate. Furthermore, effective communication is

kept open by creating a climate of honesty, inquiry, and professional learning that is

continuous (Halawah, 2005).

Effective communication is one of the proficiencies for principals defined also by

the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP). NAESP (1997)

depicts the development of skills and behaviors needed by effective elementary

principals. The other seven proficiencies are leadership behavior, group processes,

curriculum and instruction; assessment, organizational management; fiscal management,

and political management. Effective principal’s interpersonal skills are evidenced by

regarding teachers as peers and by sharing a common purpose (NAESP, 1997). It further

states that effective principals inspire a sense of confidence, loyalty, trust, and respect.

This helps to establish collaborative action and build up the school as a team according to

the NAES.

The principal’s leadership role has moved from that of a hierarchical system to

that of an interactive one (Smylie & Hart, 1997). It has expanded to that of facilitator, a

collaborative partner, a change agent, an effective communicator, a promoter of positive

school climate, and an instructional leader (Bennis & Goldsmith, 1997; Blase & Blase,

2000; Dufour, 2001; King, 2002). As the principal becomes the instructional leader, the

concept of teamwork, collaboration, and collegiality positions the principal to be

effective in interpersonal skills in order to reach organizational goals (Barrie, 2005).

Additionally, the principal’s role includes that of a decision-maker that requires effective

interpersonal communication skills (Parsons, 2001). Teachers are in a position to learn

and change as they build on the social relationship in the principal-teacher dyad. Quigley

(2000) explains this social relationship is a relationship built on support, friendliness, and

fairness. Research shows that principals’ support of teacher professional development is

very effective in the enhancement of teacher knowledge and teacher performance

(Wenglinsky, 2000).

Research studies characterize effective leaders as leaders who turn schools into

emotionally and socially intelligent schools (Brearley, 2004 & Goleman, 2006). The

emotionally intelligent school is a school where leaders lead learning; where influence

replace authority; where dialogue replaces yelling; and reflection replaces punishment

(Brearley, 2004). Emotional intelligence (EI) is best understood by four abilities or skills

(Mayer & Salovey, 1997): perceiving emotions, using emotions, understanding emotions,

and managing emotions. The research has shown that EI is very effective in forming

positive personal relationship and achieving success on the job. The socially intelligent

school is characterized by a personal leadership style (Goleman, 2006). Goleman has

extended the work of Mayer and Salovey in the area of EI. He believes that the failure

and success of a leader has to do with the qualities of the heart in the person-to-person

interaction established by the principals.

The literature reports positive effects of emotionally and socially intelligent

leadership styles, and it reports abusive leadership style as well. (Blase & Blase, 2002).

Emotional abuse (Keashly, 1998) is expressions of hostility through verbal and nonverbal

cues. Examples are facial expressions, gestures, staring, dirty looks, silent treatment,

ridicule, unfair evaluations and aggressive eye contact. Harlos and Pinder (2000) reveal

that this type of leadership has an affect on an individual’s psychological well-being,

social relationship, and job performance.

Communication is an ongoing process of making and reaffirming the social

realities that make the organization (Birk and Burk 2000). The role of effective

communication and positive climates is stressed as a primary mechanism for effective

organizational improvement (Halawah, 2005).

Many definitions of the meaning of interpersonal communication have been

developed. Interpersonal communication is used interchangeably with soft skills (Koen,

2005, Smaglik, 2004, & Lewis, 2007). They identified soft skills as the ability to

communicate, team building and solving problems. These soft skills or interpersonal

communication skills may be instrumental in opening doors to employment opportunities

(Smaglik, 2004). When soft skills are left unpracticed, even the most affluent leader is at

risk of being derailed (Koen, 2005). Bennis (1999) uses the term people skills

synonymously with interpersonal communication. He defined these skills in terms of

leadership: ability to communicate, motivate, and delegate. The meaning may vary

according to the number of communicators involved, the nature of the interaction, and the

proximity of the interaction (Hartley, 1999). For example, it may be an interaction

between two people such as a teacher-principal dyad or a small group setting. The

interaction may be feedback from the principal. Heath and Bryant (2000) define as face-

to-face encounters, oral, written, and nonverbal forms of communication, but it usually

applies to verbal communication It involves at least two people as each one affects the

other. Feelings are shared through verbal and nonverbal messages (Heath et al.). As more

research is conducted, the process of defining interpersonal communication will give a

more precise definition and clarity.

There are several characteristics of interpersonal communication. Interpersonal

communication is transactional (Dickson, 2001). It moves from the sender to the receiver

and affects both the sender and the receiver. Additionally, interpersonal communication

is bound to happen with the end in mind (Dickson, 2001). Others characterize

interpersonal communication as multi-dimensional (Ellis, 2000), and irreversible (Hargie

& Dickson, 2004). In other words, what has been said cannot be taken back.

It has been mentioned that interpersonal communication may entail two people

(Hartley, 1999). This is significant since this study is concerned with the communication

in the principal-teacher dyad . It is important to examine an interpersonal model of

communication that focuses on dyadic communication. Hargie & Dickson (2004)

developed a skilled model of communication based on earlier theories of Argyle (1983).

The model is based on three assumptions: people communicate with a purpose; people

are sensitive to the effect of their communications; and they take steps to modify their

communication. This two-person model identifies six components of skill interpersonal

communication: (1) person-situation context. The researchers note that the interaction

depends on the persons involved and what they bring to the encounter. Such elements as

knowledge, motives, personality, attitudes, and emotions shape the interaction. (2) Goals

pursued. Here a goal is desired results of the communication. (3) Mediation processes.

This process is characterized by plans and strategies to accomplish goals. (4) Response.

Responses may be nonverbal or verbal in interaction. (5) Feedback. The researchers

emphatically noted that this is a fundamental element in communication. Harige &

Dickson defined it as a reaction to what the speaker said. (6) Perception. Feedback is not

always perceived accurately according to authors of this model. Additionally, they argue

that how one views another and vice versa is crucial in interpersonal communication.

The central features of each element were discussed in more detail in chapter two of the

literature review.

The research literature on interpersonal communication has a broad list of skills or

dimensions (Hargie & Dickson, 2004). Cameron (2000) declares that skill signifies

practical expertise. In other words, one is considered skilled if he or she has acquired the

ability to do something well. Some of these skills have been identified as face-to-face

communication, trust, listening, empathy, authenticity, verbal and nonverbal cues, and

feedback.

Goddard, Moran, and Hoy (2001), note that trust seems to stand out as vital in

interpersonal communication. They argued that trust is what makes a relationship strong.

Pope (2004) stated that trust is paramount to establishing and maintaining positive

relationships at an organizational level and at an interpersonal level.

Researchers in such fields as organizational communication and organizational behavior

have studied the importance of interpersonal communication relationships within

organization structures (Yousef, 2000, Owens, 2002).

Organization communication is defined as the means of transmitting information by an

organization to its members in the organization (Price, 1997). The communication

process is a relational one in the sense that there exists some interaction between the

sender and the receiver (Hall, 2002). The sender and the receiver’s social relationship

affect the communication process. For example, if the sender is somewhat intimidated by

the receiver in the process of message transmission, the message and its interpretation

will be affected. Those who hold leadership positions spend 80% of their time in

interpersonal communications such as face-to-face interactions, attending meetings,

answering phones, attending to mail, giving feedback, and solving conflicts. This places

communication, particularly, interpersonal communication at the heart of the

organization, and efforts to make decisions rely on the communication process (Hall,

2002). The communication process includes communicators, medium, channel, noise,

feedback, and context (Hargie and Dickson, 2004). Communicators are sender and

receiver of messages simultaneously. The message is whatever the communicators wish

to share. Medium entails on how the message is shared. The channel of communication

connects the source and receiver. A code is simply a system of meaning that the group

shares. Noise is any interference that causes a disruption in the communication. This

interruption causes the message to be misunderstood.

Organization behavior is described as that discipline that seeks to understand human

behavior in an organizational environment (Owens, 2004). In order to improve the

performance of the organization, the leader must work through people to achieve

organizational goals (Hall, 2002). For example, the principal confers with teachers one-

on-one or in small groups. Additionally, understanding the behavior of people in the

work environment is paramount to the success of the organization.

Interpersonal communication can be understood by considering the

communicator’s style. Communcator’s style considers what and how things are said

(Coeling & Cukr, 2000). Particular interest to this study is the communicator’s image of

himself. If a person views himself as a good communicator, communicating with others

would not pose a problem or vice versa. According to this theory, perception of self plays

an important role in the way one may communicate. Some types of communicating styles

are dominant, contentious, and attentive. Dominant communication is characterized by

speaking strongly in a take-charge manner. Contentious is communication that is

argumentative and quick to challenge. Attentive is very careful and empathetic

communication.

Styles of communication and personality have interested researchers (Leung and

Bond, 2001 & Daly, 2002). Interpersonal communication research is incomplete without

the inclusion of communication styles of behavior and personality (Leung et al.).

Personality has been framed with the Five-Factor Model (Kornor & Nordvik, 2004).

There are five domains of this model: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness,

Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Neuroticism is being anxious. Outgoing and

assertiveness represent extraversion. Openness is the tendency to be creative.

Agreeableness is represented by kindness, gentle, trusting, and trustworthy.

Conscientiousness entails achievement and dependability. It correlates best with job

performance. The extraversion personality is equated with the Norton’s (1983)

nondirective communication style (Weaver, 2005).

Theories or models of leadership can be viewed by two broad themes that come

from the literature: transactional leadership style (task-orientation) and transformational

leadership style (relationship-orientation). Transactional style of leadership is described

as authoritative and not conducive to change (Aldoory and Toth, 2004). They also

describe this leadership style as one that has “clear direction, certainty, personal

oversight, and perceptions of just treatment” (p.159) as being synonymous with

charismatic leadership. In other words, the leaders of this style are able to promote

interest and motivate followers. Transformational leaders are characterize by their “risk

taking, goal articulation, high expectation, self-assertion, vision, and emphasis on

collective identity” (Ehrhart and Klein, 2001, p.159). There are other scholars that do

focus on leadership styles but would rather focus on situation theory of leadership

(Casimir, 2001; Lord, Brown, Harvey, & Hall, 2002). According to this theory, the

leader may sometimes employ transactional style and other times employ

transformational style. Other styles of leadership such as trait, situation, and participative

will be fully discussed in Chapter 2 of the literature review.

Included also in the leadership category is leadership style. Leadership style is

defined as leadership behaviors that cane be measured (Richmond & Allison, 2003). A

few styles to name are collaborative or distributed, moral or ethical, authenticity, and

many more.

School leadership is described as “people intensive” which means that principals

are constantly interacting with someone (Smith and Piele, 1997 p. 22). They explain that

principals must have specific skills to cope with others. Bennis (1999) iterates that all

skills are important; nevertheless, future exemplary leaders will be known by their

mastery of people skills, taste, judgment, and character.

Interpersonal communication skills are vital in a workplace where new job

requirements, new skills, and new ways of working with people are changing at

drastically (North & Worth, 2002). In 1990, the Department of Labor formed a

committee to conduct a longitudinal study on how schools were preparing students for

the workforce. Entitle Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills

(SCANS); this momentous work became the platform for businesses to communicate to

educators what students should know. Such as the importance of developing

interpersonal competencies and skills in communication, that one needs to know to

succeed in the workplace. The SCANS (U.S. Department of Labor, 1992) Report is a

longitudinal study that identified such interpersonal skills as working collaboratively as a

team, teaching others, serving others, leading others, working well with others from a

diverse culture, and negotiating. Managers, business personnel, line workers, factory

workers, restaurant personnel, and others across the U. S. were surveyed to seek

information concerning skills needed to be successful in the work place. This work was

completed in 1992, yet it is still of value today according to North and Worth.

Additionally, a study conducted by Charter Institute of Personnel and

Development Training 2004 Survey surveyed personnel professionals in the private and

public sector. The questionnaire ranked behavioral and interpersonal communication

skills as the sixth of seven of the most important skills in organizations. The other skills

to mention were induction, health and safety, technical skills, professional development

and government driven training.

Ingersol (2001) argues that diversity and pluralistic views now characterize public

schools. Interpersonal communication difficulties will accompany the more “culturally

diverse” workplace that is forecast. This signifies a need to stimulate more research in the

area of interpersonal communication skills (Kikoski, 1999).

A solid and shared understanding develops among people as they interact over time

(Hart, 1995). Hart explains that they interpret the communication they receive from one

another. He contends that there is an importance of the meaning and symbols

communicated through interaction in how people develop self-concepts and assess

themselves based on their beliefs about how others see and evaluate them. The literature

has shown that other people’s perceptions of behavior are often the measure or test of

skill effectiveness. If the teacher perceives the principal in a different way than he or she

perceives himself, then it is almost certain that the principal will have problems in

performing his or her duties; his or her staff will almost certainly behave towards the

principal in the way they perceive the principal (Pashiardis, 2001).

This study examined teachers’ perceptions of principals’ interpersonal

communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. It was important to conduct

this study, because it provided new insights for improving administrative and teacher

relations as a means to attain effective schools. Principals and those who aspire to

become principals will become aware of the importance of interpersonal communication

skills in effectively building trust, promoting respect, raising teacher morale, and

improving teacher performance in schools.

Statement of the Problem

The literature has evidenced the importance and the necessity that leaders must

possess interpersonal communication skills in an organization. Education literature is

replete with the concept that an effective principal is the key figure in creating effective

schools. In the light of the literature, effective schools are understood from the correlates

of effective schools as discussed in the literature.

The National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) has listed

communication skills as one of the eight proficiencies for effective elementary and

secondary principals. It is well documented that the principal must keep the doors of

communication open in order to foster good positive school climate for a successful

school (Halawah, 2005). A positive climate involves interpersonal or people skills such

as feedback, collaborations and shared decision-making. The principal of today must be

able to lead a diverse workforce (Shim, 2003). A diverse workforce is described as being

different in gender, color, nationality, and culture. An effective leader must be able to

relate to people across cultures. As the literature has already revealed, the diverse

workforce brings with it different perceptions, different value systems, and different

languages to the workplace.

The literature lacks a consensus among researchers as to what constitutes essential

interpersonal communication skills that promote effective teacher performance. This

study was a step in alleviating this confusion by trying to determine which interpersonal

communication skills as perceived by teachers were most effective and essential in

increasing teaching performance. There was an even greater need to establish and

understand the role that these skills play in the principal-teacher dyad in promoting

effective teacher performance.

The correlates for effective schools have revealed that school climate, which

includes interpersonal communication, is important in promoting teacher performance as

well as the student achievement.

The purpose of this study was to examine teachers’ perceptions of principals’

interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. It is important

to study interpersonal skills or people skills. According to Hall (2002), organizations

need people power to meet organizational goals. Organizations are moving from

compartmentalizing and moving to team working (Charles, 2005). He argued that soft

skills are at the heart of an organization. It is widely accepted that teachers have a direct

impact on student success and achievement (Blanton, 2006). Studies have shown that the

principal is the key player in the school affecting teachers as well as students.

Research Questions

The primary focus of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perception of

principal’s interpersonal communication skills and to understand the role these skills play

in teacher performance. It is important to understand the role that these skills may play

since teacher performance is directly related to student achievement and success.

The overarching question of this study is this: what role does interpersonal

communication skills of the principal play in teacher performance?

The following subquestions will also guide the research:

1. Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact

teacher performance in the school setting?

2. How does the teachers’ perception of their principal affect teacher performance?

Significance of the Study

There is a large body of knowledge concerning the importance of interpersonal

communication skills of principals (Hall, 2000). It has been well defined in the literature

that the effective principal is the key element of an effective school. His or Her impact

affects the entire instructional organization of the school. It was clearly seen from the

literature that interpersonal communication skills of principal are crucial in establishing

trust, thus resulting in teaching that is more effective. There have been limited research

studies that identify which skill or skills of interpersonal communication are most

effective and most essential in promoting teacher performance. Research studies have

relied greatly on surveys of principals and teachers for information. This qualitative study

utilized multiple methods such as a, focus groups, and one on one interview, in order to

gather information that surveys alone may not reveal.

This study may help principals become aware of the importance of collegiality,

trust and respect in their relationship with their teachers, and help to improve teacher

performance. This study is important to the principal because it increases awareness of

which essential and most effective interpersonal communication skills promote teacher

performance. Not only that, but also it increases awareness of the impact that his or her

interpersonal skills have on teacher performance resulting in greater student achievement.

Procedures

This is a qualitative study, including authoethnographic mode of inquiry.

Authoethnography is a qualitative research method where self is a source of data

(Duncan, 2004). It describes research studies of a personal nature (Ellis & Bochner,

2000). They further explain that the researcher’s style of writing is highly personal using

his/her own experiences to further understanding of events in society. According to Ellis

and Bochner, this method is best for this study in that the researcher will give voice to the

study and will share invaluable inside knowledge that is not expressed through traditional

forms of inquiry.

The primary method of collecting data for this study was through structured one-

on-one interviews. Such data as dialogues, documents, stories, and personal reflections

and testimonies were collected to address research questions for this study.

Confidentiality of participants was maintained in compliance with IRB requirements.

The researcher interviewed five teachers from northeast Georgia schools. Three

school levels were represented: elementary, middle, and high school. The researcher

sought certified teachers of any age group who taught from K-12 grades. Classroom

experience ranged from novice teacher to veterans. All teachers were employed in a

public school and they were employed by the school district where research was

conducted. The researcher sought a diverse group of teachers that differed in gender, age

and ethnicity. Teacher participants were teachers of various subjects. The rationale for

such a diverse group was to get various perspectives.

Random sampling was used in selecting participants for this research. Upon the

approval from the IRB (Institute Review Board), the researcher put the names of all

schools in the district in boxes according to levels labeled elementary schools- A, middle

schools- B, and high schools- C. There were 35 schools: 13 elementary schools, 11

middle schools, and 11 high schools. The researcher pulled from each box until ten

schools from each level had been randomly selected. From those ten schools randomly

pulled, the researcher emailed 150 letters seeking teacher participants for face-to-face

interviews. Teacher participants were provided information concerning this research

project and a demographic survey sheet. The researcher received responses from three

high schools, four middle schools, and three elementary schools conveying willingness to

participate. The researcher gathered those teacher responses and placed them in boxes

labeled: elementary schools A, middle schools B, and high schools C. Two names per

school level were selected randomly from the boxes. These teacher participants were

contacted through email to set up an interview time and place. One high school teacher

participant self-eliminated. This left a remaining number of five participants. Then the

researcher repeated the process of randomly pulling from the remaining teacher responses

in an effort to replace the participant who self-eliminated

The researcher followed the interview procedures as outline by Leedy and Omrod

(2001). Setting up the interview was done in a timely manner and convenient for the

participants. All interviews were confirmed in writing. About five days before the

interviews, reminder notices were sent through email or standard mail. The researcher

obtained permission to tape the interview sessions

In addition, the researcher employed an experienced panel of six teachers of

various grade levels. These teachers had thirty or more years of teaching experience in

the public school system, and were well-trained practioners in the field. These

experienced teachers were drawn from a cohort of Georgia Southern University doctoral

students in the Educational Administration program. This experienced panel of teachers

aided the researcher in developing questions for the interviews.

After a list of questions was generated, the researcher emailed the questions to the

methodologist for his view, comments and approval. Then, the methodologist emailed his

approval of ten interview questions that he believed would aid the researcher in

addressing the research.

The following steps were used to analyze the data: The researcher organized data

by using index cards, file folders. The index cards were used for note taking during

interviews. The researcher documented reoccurring themes that she thought were major

points of interest discussed by participants. These were filed into small file folders with a

theme written on them. This allowed the data to be broken down into smaller manageable

units. The researcher continued to revisit audiotapes, notes, words and stories of the

participants. Other themes were added as some were deleted from the small file. The

researcher’s own knowledge and perceptions allowed her to identify common themes in

the data. Some of the themes were deleted as others were added. The researcher kept

records of revelations. A recording strategy of keeping memos was employed. A memo

is conversing with self about what has occurred in the research process (Jacelon &

O’Dell, 2000). The researcher spoke into a digital recorder to guard thoughts and

interpretations of the data. The recordings were revisited many times to gain

understanding of the data. As the recordings, stories, and small file folders were revisited,

it was then that themes were clearly revealed. The themes from the data were

verbal/face-to-face, written communication, feedback, trust, support, care, respect, and

worth. Each participant consistently expressed thoughts concerning these themes. After

all information had been written on index cards and transferred to small file folders, the

researcher typed information into a chart to review themes and how they connected to the

review of literature.

Participants were invited to review statements and stories rendered to ensure the

validity and reliability of the study. All audiotaped interviews were transcribed by using

IBM Via Voice and again participants were given the opportunity to review audiotapes of

the interview to ensure validity of the study.

The researcher reported data through a personal narrative style of writing,

drawing on her personal experiences as well as the experience of others. In addition, the

researcher created tables to report the data and used captions to explain findings.

Limitations

The study presented the following limitations: The demographic profile of the

participants was not essential to the study findings; and one participant decided to end her

involvement in this study due to time constraints.

Definition of Terms

Interpersonal communication – Encompasses oral, written, and nonverbal

communication. It involves two or more people. Some examples are face-to-face,

feedback, listening, and empathy.

Interpersonal skills – Skills that effectively engage with others and establish trust,

credibility, and confidence (Hargie & Dickson, 2004).

Leader – One who motivates, empowers, inspires, others. In addition, one who

collaborates with, encourages others, and creates an environment where employees feel a

sense of ownership.

Perception - Perception is recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli based on

mostly memory. It is also defined as insight, intuition, or knowledge gained by

perceiving; becoming aware; and using the senses to achieve understanding.

Communicator Style - The way one communicates with another.

Summary

Owens (2004) explained that leadership is not just something provided to

subordinates, but it is a process involving dynamic interaction. He maintains that leaders

tend to be elected to position according to the perceived ability or power to satisfy the

needs of the group and accept responsibility for moving the group forward. The

organizational environment is the key to influencing organizational behavior. Valuable

information has been revealed concerning the importance of interpersonal

communication skills of principals. Interpersonal communication has been discussed

from the perspective of leadership styles and gender. Transformational and transactional

leadership styles are the two styles that the literature supported.

There is overwhelming evidence in educational literature concerning the importance of

interpersonal communication skills in attaining organizational goals. The principal’s role

is strongly tied to his or her ability to communicate and to manage any conflict that may

arise. As an instructional leader, the principal must be an effective leader in interpersonal

communication to build collaborative teams, instill a sense of collegiality, trust and

respect in order to build a positive school climate among teachers.

The purpose of the study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perception of principals’

interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. This study

added new knowledge, and it helped raise the consciousness of the importance of the role

of the principals’ interpersonal communications skills. This study utilized auto-

ethnographical qualitative method. In-depth interviews were conducted as well.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. A

substantial amount of literature on interpersonal communication skills provides a basis

for the present study. It is a fact that interpersonal communication skills are important

and necessary in any dyadic relationship. It has been explained that leadership involves

dynamic reaction and interaction. There remains the unknown issue as to which

interpersonal communication skills of principals are most productive in promoting

effective teacher performance. Teacher performance is a major factor in student success.

With the No Child Left Behind Act, there is pressure to meet standards. In an

effort to accommodate this law, classroom sizes have been decreased, funds have been

allocated for supplies and materials, and research based strategies of teaching have been

employed. The role of the principals’ interpersonal communication skills and knowing

which skills are most effective as they relate to teacher performance may help satisfy the

mandate not to leave any child behind.

The review of the literature examined the theoretical and empirical studies in the

field of education leadership.

An Overview of the History of Interpersonal Communication

Before the 1960s, there were few studies conducted under the title of interpersonal

communication, which marked the beginning of the field of interpersonal

communication. The usage of the term communication demonstrated that it indeed played

a significant role in human behavior (Health &Bryant, 2000). The 1960s research studies

influenced the development of the interpersonal field of communication. The studies of

personality and its influence on relationships revealed that many psychiatric problems are

due to interpersonal relations as well as self-problem (Segrin and Flora, 2000). Studies in

humanistic psychology conceptualized that relationships could be improved through

effective communication (Gable & Shean, 2000).

Initially, interpersonal research focused on persuasion, social influence, and small

group processes (Berger, 2005). These three focus points of interpersonal research that

Berger points out need to be explained. Persuasion is one way that leaders influence

teacher’s attitudes, ideas, and behaviors. The principal as a persuasive communicator

employs credibility, expertise, trustworthiness. Here, the principal may deliver a variety

of degrees of reasons in his or her message. For example, he or she may deliver a

message of fear, or comfort. The audience that receives the message is of a variety of

demographics and personality traits. The principal normally chooses his or her best

method of communication such as email, face-to-face or the printed word. Social

influence is so tied to interpersonal communications in that people’s thoughts, feelings, as

well as behaviors affect others. Group processes are the way people interact and influence

each other in a group setting. Principals employ groups to improve decision-making. The

studies of Kurt Lewin (1939), the father of modern Social Psychology, influenced the

emerging field of interpersonal communication. He proposed that an individual’s

environment had much to do with an individual’s behavior. He also developed theories of

individual personalities and interpersonal conflicts. The early research studies of

Festinger (1959), Heider (1958), and Hovland (1953) were a direct impact from Lewin.

These three researchers studied under the tutelage of Lewin and further extended his

work. Festinger became the father of cognitive dissonance theory that leads to a change

in attitude and behavior. Heider explored the nature of interpersonal communications and

developed the attribution theory. He also published The Psychology of Interpersonal

Relations that was a major breakthrough in the field (Heath & Bryant, 2000). This is

explained by the means in which people attribute the behavior of others. For example, a

person may give because he or she is pressured to give. Hovland used his knowledge of

applied psychology learned from Lewin to explore interpersonal communication process.

The 1970s ushered in a change in focus into the domain of social interactions,

relational development, and relational control (Kelly & Thibaut, 1978). ). Shannon and

Weaver (1949) developed a mathematical theory called information theory of

communication that led Berger’s Uncertainty Reduction Theory. Berger and Calabrese

(1975) have been accredited with the Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT) that paved

the way for interpersonal communication. The URT is defined as the numerous ways in

which an interactant may behave in a given situation. The greater the level of uncertainty

in a relationship decreases the chance of predicting behaviors and occurrences.

The 1980s was the period of cognitive approaches to interpersonal

communication. The work of Knapp (1984), Planalp and Honeycutt (1985) helped mold

interpersonal communication as it is known today. Because of their research efforts,

interpersonal communication not only focuses on language, social cognition, and social

psychology, but also interpersonal communication focuses on dyadic communication

(Elfenvein, Foo, Boldry, and Tan, 2006), face-to-face-interaction (Kikoski, 1998) or as a

communication to develop others (Bennis, 1999 and Nuttall, 2004).

The Importance of Interpersonal Communication Skills

Within every human being, there is a need to interact with others (Affi &

Guerrero, 2000). The need to communicate satisfies the building of social bonds (Leary,

2001). For example, by observing our early ancestors who lived in groups to survive, he

hypothesized that those who lived in groups were more likely to survive than those who

lived alone. Coover and Murphy (2000) interjected that self develops identity through

interaction. In other words, a person becomes who he or she is through interaction with

others. This is significant to principals in that they are developed through interaction

with their teachers.

The importance of interpersonal communication is seen in the writings of ancient

writers. Kagemni, the son of Pharaoh Huni, advised him on good social behavior towards

authority and fellow human beings. He counseled on speech discretion when he wrote,

“The innermost chamber is opened to the man of silence.”

(Http://egypt.thetao.info/texts.html). The saying means that when a person listens and

observes before speaking, he is able to see the heart or motives of another. Ptah-hotep,

who has been credited as author of the oldest book Precept, wrote elegantly about how

one should communicate with a disputant. Not all interaction is pleasant but even the

Holy Bible (Gen. 2:18, King James) emphasizes the importance of personal interaction: it

is not good that man should be alone. Engaging in effective communication contributes

to a healthy emotional state (Gable & Shean, 2000). In line with the same thinking, when

one engages in communication that is not meaningful, the result is usually loneliness,

unhappiness, and depression (William and Zadiro, 2001).

Individuals with strong interpersonal communication skills cope better with stress,

handle major life transitions, and are less likely to suffer from depression and anxiety

(Segrin and Flora, 2000). Those who are skilled in interaction are resilient to down falls

in life (Segrin, 2000). In light of these research findings, training is now being offered

for many organizations (Argyle, 1999). Successful managers are equated with having

good interpersonal communication skills (Hargie & Tourish, 2000). Entrepreneurs who

possess good interpersonal communication skills have advantages in obtaining funding,

establishing a positive relationship with customers, and securing quality employees

(Baron & Markman, 2000).

The Nature of Interpersonal Communication Skills

The literature reveals many definitions of interpersonal communication that is

worth mentioning. In order to illustrate this point, it is necessary to examine some

definitions of earlier theorists to the present.

Some earlier researchers conceptualized that interpersonal communication is

synonymous with human communication (Applbaum, Anatol, Hays, Jenson, Porter, &

Mandel, 1973). This is because communication takes place between people. The earlier

work of Miller and Sunnafrank (1982) introduced another important concept:

situationally bound criteria. In other words, there are certain situations that constitute

interpersonal communications: those who are communicating are in small numbers;

communicators are face to face; communicators are in close proximity; all senses are

used; and there is an opportunity for feedback. There are disadvantages that this concept

poses. First, the definition is not clear. Some situations may or may not fit in this

definition. For example, is it to say that people cannot communicate by telephone or any

other mechanical mean and is it classified as interpersonal communication? Secondly,

this definition implies that the process of communication is static, whereas it is dynamic

and constantly moving. Miller and Sannafrank explained that the situationist defines

interpersonal communication in the context of its situation:

If two individuals engage in eyeball-to-eyeball

interaction, they are communicating interpersonally,

whether they are total strangers or close friends. For

the situationist, a phatic greeting exchange between

nodding acquaintances qualifies as interpersonal com-

communication, but a telephone conversation between a husband

and wife does not…. In short, the situational approach at large

ignores quantitative and qualitative changes in the nature

and outcome of a communicative transaction in the develop-

ing relationship between the communicators (p. 222).

Sannafrank and Miller use the developmental approach to define interpersonal

communication. Previously it was stated that interpersonal communication is dynamic

and constantly moving instead of remaining static. This is the concept of the

developmental approach. It moves from one point to another. Sannafrank and Miller

described this as moving from impersonal to interpersonal. By impersonal, they explain

that the communicators are simply functioning within their social roles and they are not

getting to know one another as a person. They further explain if the communicators

continue their relationship, interpersonal communication skills must sharpen to allow the

relationship to grow. Brooks and Health (1993) define interpersonal communication as

the exchange of information, meanings, and feelings through verbal and nonverbal

messages. Others use Interpersonal communication skills interchangeably with soft skills

(Koen, 2005, Smaglik, 2004, & Lewis, 2007). These researchers iterate that these skills

may encompass written and nonverbal communication. In addition, some researchers

suggest that interpersonal communication skills are equated with people skills and

communication skills (Wallis, Steptoe, & Miranda, 2006). They contend that there should

be more emphasis on communication skills, which are the ability to work with people

from different cultures. They further state that theses skills must be developed. Simply

put, interpersonal communication skills are those skills needed to interact with others

effectively. (Hargie & Dickson 2004).

In the Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills Report (SCANS,

1992), interpersonal communication skills are described as a team player, assist

customers, lead others, negotiate, and be culturally competent. Because of this report,

organizations began to use this definition as a measure for employment. By 2002, 80%

of ads included interpersonal communications as defined by the SCANS Report.

Understanding the Communication Process

Communication does not just happen; it is a process of sending and receiving

messages (Heath & Bryant, 2000). An understanding of interpersonal communication

can be examined through models devised by earlier researchers of communication. There

are several models to consider: Aristotle‘s Verbal Model, Lasswell’s Model, Shannon-

Weaver, Berlo Model, Ross Model as reported by Heath & Bryant.

Aristotle’s model paved the way for interpersonal communication, as we know it

today. It sets the foundation for the three major elements of communication: the speaker,

the message, and the audience. All interpersonal communications must include these

three elements.

Another pioneer in the field of interpersonal communication is Lasswell. In

addition to the speaker, the message, and the audience, he put importance on the channel

and effect of the message. According to this model, channel is the medium in which the

message is transmitted. Effect is how the message affects the receiver.

Shannon & Weaver (1949) labeled one communicator as the source and the other

as the receiver. The communicators exchange thoughts, and feelings, which are

messages. They argue that this is the content of communication.

David Berol published the Berlo Model in 1960 with the premise that one must

understand human behavior in order to understand communication. Berlo’s model reveals

five factors that increase fidelity: Communication skills, attitudes, knowledge level,

position within a social system, and culture. This model identifies the primary

communication skills as speaking and writing. The second factor identifies attitude

toward self, toward the subject matter, and toward the receiver. This model has the

assumption that when the attitude is negative, so will the communications be. The

knowledge factor according to Berlo’s model is important for both the source and the

receiver. One must have a good knowledge base in order to communicate with a

purpose. The fourth and fifth factors are very much integrated in communication. The

social system and culture have a great influence on communication. This model reveals

that people in different social classes and those who have different roles do differ in

communication styles. The weakness of this model is the lack of feedback.

The Ross model stresses climate as a powerful influence in interpersonal

communication. The climate here is explained as the sender’s information knowledge,

the sender’s past experience with the knowledge, his feelings, attitudes, and emotions at

the time of reception. According to this model, the receiver decodes the stimuli for

interpretation. Here the decoding process is defined as selecting and sorting out the

stimuli that has something in common with the receiver’s culture. Culture has the same

influence as climate: feelings, attitudes, emotions, and knowledge. As the message is

interpreted, the receiver gives feedback. This feedback is the receiver’s reaction to the

message. The strength of this model is the emphasis that Ross places on climate.

Having examined these models of interpersonal communication, the researcher

will use as a conceptual model based on earlier theorizing by Argyle (1983). This

includes communicator, message, medium, perception, emotion, and feedback.

The way in which the message is conveyed is medium. It is said that face-face

communication is a more effective form of communication than emailing (O’Sullivan,

2000). The channel and medium are used interchangeably, but there is a slight

difference. Channel is what connects the sender and the receiver. It entails the channel

that carries speech, nonverbal communication, smell and touch. All communication has

signs and symbols of meanings that are shared by the communicators. The use of Braile

or Morse code would be examples. Finally, noise refers to anything that interrupts the

communication process.

Interpersonal Communication Skills: A Humanistic Approach to Leadership

Abrell (1974) believes that releasing human potential in the supervisory teacher

relationship is done through a humanistic approach of communication. A humanistic

approach to communications deals with human values. A few examples of these values

or dimensions are perception, nonverbal, listening, feedback, empathy, trust, and

authenticity.

Perception

Perception is “ a compromise between what the organism is given to see and what

the organism is set to see or wants to see or even what the organism wants to avoid

seeing” (Bruner and Postman ,1948 p.85). Perception plays a vital role in interpersonal

communication.

Each person sees the world from a different perspective (Gaziel, 2003). He also

explains that the world’s view of leaders is derived from early personal experiences. In a

research study, it was revealed how school principals perceive their world as leaders and

how principal effectiveness is predicted. A combination of qualitative and quantitative

methods was applied. Twenty-one elementary principals were chosen randomly from a

list of twenty-six principals enrolled in an in-service training program at Bar IIan

University in Israel in 2001-2001. Each participant was interviewed for approximately

sixty minutes. For the quantitative component of the investigation, sixty primary school

principals completed a survey instrument chosen randomly. The researchers categorized

the principals’ views into four different frames: (1) structural frame (goals and

efficiency), (2) human resource frame (human needs), (3) political frame (group

interests), and (4) symbolic frame (meaning to life). One finding showed the human

resource frame from the perception of both principal and teacher was consistently the

best predictor of both manager and leadership effectiveness. Another finding showed

that when leaders valued relationships, feelings, and lead through empowerment, success

was the result. The human resource leader seeks to solve problems through interpersonal

means. Findings also showed that the political frame was the most frequent frame used.

From the perception of principal and teacher participants, the principal dealt with solving

problems through negotiations and persuasion among those with influence. The

perception of the principal and teacher differed from a structural frame view. Teachers

reported that principals used the structural frame, which dealt with timelines, planning,

attention to details and setting measurable goals. Principals reported using this frame as

necessary. Gaziel argues that perception plays a vital role in performance. He explains

that teachers perceived planning, timelines, and measurement as control forces. In other

words, teachers felt that professional autonomy was threatened. The principal viewed it

as a normal way of doing things. The study findings revealed that the structural frame

was the best predictor of manager effectiveness but not leader effectiveness. Both

principal and teacher viewed the symbolic frame as the worse predictor of manager and

leadership effectiveness

Nonverbal

Not all face-to-face encounters rely on what is being said. Nonverbal

communication is a great source of information in portraying feelings about others and

self (Bull, 2002). Such emotional cues as anger, sadness, disgust, fear and surprise can be

manifested through facial expressions. Nonverbal communication (NVC) entails bodily

activity through facial expression, gestures, and movements. Remland (2000) notes that

NVC could be done simultaneously whereas verbal communication (VC) is done by

turns.

Listening

An even more important and a vital skill of interpersonal communication is that of

listening. The adult spends 70% of time communicating. Of this, 45% is spent listening,

30% speaking, 16% reading, and 9% writing. In the workplace, 55% is spent listening,

23% speaking, 13.3% reading, and 8.4% writing. Managers listening increased to 63%

(Janusik & Wolvin). Stewart and Cash (2000) report how:

Surveys of thousands of corporations in the U. S. revealed

that poor listening skills are a major barrier in nearly all

positions from accountants to supervisors; good listening

skills are considered critical to entry-level positions,

effective performance, high productivity, managerial

competency, and promotion within most organizations.

Rosenbaum (2001) conducted a study of 1000 salespeople and found that the

ability to listen effectively defined success. Likewise, Goby and Lewis (2000) in a study

of the insurance industry found that the interpersonal communication was the primary

skill for success.

Petress (2001, p.261) defines listening as “the awareness of, the rending to, the

organization of, and the operationalization of data entering our nervous system via

hearing mechanism.” Additionally, he maintains that listening is quite different from

hearing in the sense that listening is an active cognitive activity whereas hearing is not.

According to Petress, good listeners: (1) pay close attentions to details such as facts,

opinions, and inferences; (2) give the speaker a nonverbal cue that they are attentive; and

(3) give verbal cues that they are listening such as constructive feedback. The listener is

able to pose questions for clarity; paraphrase the speaker’s intent and content of

conversation; (4) show respect in tone; (5) do not distort what the speaker has said; (6)

detect in speakers atypical communication and is able to find reasons for this

communication behavior; and (7) give honest, respectful and clear acknowledgement of

what the speaker said.

Listening defined in the interpersonal context is regarded as that process where

the person attends carefully to verbal and nonverbal signals that are emitted by another

(Hill & O’Brien, 1999). There are many types of listening such as discriminative,

comprehension, evaluative, appreciative, emphatic, dialogic and active. This study will

only be concerned with dialogic and active listening as it pertains to interpersonal

communication. Halone and Pecchioni (2001) report that dialogic listening is two-way

and relational mainly because there is an exchange of views. They further iterate that

each person brings to the listening process culture and racial biases. In other words, there

is a tendency to judge others from one’s own perspective. On the other hand, Halone and

Pecchioni report that active listening needs to involve both nonverbal and verbal

behavior. Additionally, they report that there is a need for listeners to respond

appropriately and not to just listen to words. Along this line of thinking, people normally

listen with the intent to respond instead of the intent to understand (Van Slyke,1999). He

further argues that one is concerned with his or her own point of view instead of the other

person’s perspective.

Orick (2002) ties listening to effective leadership. He reports that effective leaders

give good attention by looking the speaker in the eye; leaders are able to paraphrase what

the speaker said; leaders are able to communicate the message to a third party; leaders

keep an open mind and do not get emotional or defensive; and leaders keep confidence.

Taylor, Cook, Green, and Rogers, (1988) investigated the effects of training on

the interpersonal skill of supervisors during interview with teachers. These skills

included listening as a vital skill in teacher improvement. The study consisted of 4

building principals (3 males and 1 female) in central Utah schools. Of the 4 principals, 3

were elementary and 1 was middle school. The research design was a single-case design

that took place in four phases: Pretraining; training and posttraining; extended history;

and retraining. Trained observers rated the videotaping using Interview Rating Scale. The

results of the study revealed that after interpersonal skill training in listening, supervisors

viewed themselves as being more effective in establishing instructional goals. Teachers

viewed their supervisors as being more attentive to their needs.

Feedback

Hansen (2004) maintains that without feedback how will teachers know when

excellence has been achieved. He suggests a feedback system that processes listening,

hearing, gathering, and assessing critical performance information. This means that the

organizations, even schools, should employ objective means of collecting data and

soliciting unfiltered feedback. Additionally, he iterates that one advantage of feedback

system is that it allows the principal or any leader to attack problems early and strengthen

the values and goals of the school. He also maintains that feedback systems allow

teachers to exchange ideas and expertise at an operational level.

Evans (2006) revealed that leaders often fail to give feedback such as praise and

redirection to those who trust in their leadership. She adds that most people perceive

feedback as criticism. She explains that feedback is something that is given in the

moment, and it is ongoing process. She believes that feedback is a number one problem

in interpersonal communication. In addition, good leaders must invest in the people,

which requires more than the minimum requirement. She argues that leaders, including

principals, should have enough courage to ask for feedback as well as give feedback.

This will help their leadership skills.

Kacmar, Zivnuska, Witt, and Gully (2003) tested the hypothesis that high

frequency leader and subordinate interaction moderates the relationship between leader

and member exchange (LMX). Leader member exchange suggests that supervisors

determine the roles of their subordinates based on their relationship with them. They

suggest that if a low frequency of communication exists between leader and subordinate,

this may restrict feedback and attention that the leader needs to give to subordinate. This

also creates uncertainty. In the case of principal-teacher dyad, the teacher will be

uncertain as to work performance. If the LMX is more frequent, a high-quality dyadic

relationship is formed and feedback occurs frequently as well. Subjects for this study

were 254 employees of a distribution company. They were divided into small groups and

were informed about the study. Workers were assigned to specific supervisors to perform

such tasks as sorting, packaging, shipping and lifting. Within the first week, 19 first-line

supervisors were asked to rate the performance of their workers. Communication

frequency and job performance ratings were measured by using five-item scales. As

hypothesized, the ratings of the supervisors were based on the frequency of

communication. Those who had frequent communications with their supervisors received

quality-job performance ratings. Performance ratings were much lower when supervisors

and subordinate did not communicate frequently.

Empathy

Feng, Lazar, & Preece (2004) define empathy as inferring one’s feelings and

responding with sensitivity and compassion towards another person’s distress.

Documentation shows that empathy depends greatly on nonverbal cues in face-to-face

communication (Ikes, 1997). The impact of nonverbal cues in face-to-face

communication is illustrated in how Kennedy won the presidential debate (Jelphs, 2006).

If the debate had not been televised, the outcome may have been different for Kennedy.

Nixon was very articulate and the radio alone would have won it for him. Additionally,

as Kennedy spoke, his body language communicated more meaning than words alone.

Empathy gives emotional support in a relationship and opens the doors to good

interpersonal communication skills (Vail, 2005).

Trust

Preece (2000) suggests that trust develops from empathy. When people have

different knowledge bases and experiences, trust enables collaboration to takes place

without much difficulty (Gefen, 2000) Applebaum (1973) maintains that trust is

communicated by what one says and does in the interpersonal setting. For example, if

one’s language and behavior is perceived as being conflicting, then trust is reduced.

Goddard, Moran, and Hoy (2001) state that trust is what makes a relationship strong.

They define trust as a “willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based

on the expectations that that party will perform an action of importance. Pope (2004)

states that trust is paramount to establishing and maintaining positive relationships at an

organizational level and at an interpersonal level. He further states that when trust has

been established, doors to good communication are open.

Rafferty (2003) argues that if there is distrust between organization members,

their commitment, motivation, confidence, and perceptions at work may be negatively

affected. Additionally, he iterated that trust influences individual member behavior and

organizational dynamics. Furthermore, he gave four points on the trust relationship

between teacher and principal: (1) the more trust perceived in relationships between the

teacher and principal, the less risk is perceived when interpersonally communicating

about professional issues; (2) when there is less risk, teachers are encouraged to

participate in the continual improvement of the school’s processes and systems; (3)

participation in school improvement connects the teacher and principal in a collaborative

contribution to a cause much greater than themselves.

Authenticity

Authenticity is another element in the humanistic concept of interpersonal

communication. Authenticity is the degree to which one is true to one’s own personality,

spirit, or character, despite external pressures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authenticity).

Kerfoot (2006) describes authenticity as being real, true to self, and honest. This type of

interpersonal communication inspires followers. Additionally, leaders themselves cannot

attribute such title of authentic leadership to themselves (Goffee and Jones, 2005). Those

who experience their leadership ascribe this title to them. If subordinates perceive a

leader to be honest, kind, true to self and vision, this title authentic leader will be ascribed

the leader. Leaders with a deep purpose that reflect their own values are authentic leaders

(George, 2003). They see themselves as servants or stewards instead of the building

administrator. In order to manage perception of authenticity, leaders must constantly

keep words consistent with actions (Goffee & Jones, 2005).

Leadership Defined

Foster (2004) describe leadership as a social event that is shared by others. Many

equate school leadership with the principalship (Foster & St. Hilaire, 2003; Gronn, 2002;

Katzenmeyer & Moller, 2001). Others view leadership as being distributed among all

(Barth, 2001, Donaldson, 2001, Spillane et al.2000, Gronn, 2002). Sharing or

distributing leadership responsibilities may be done through strong interpersonal skills if

collective action is to take place (Smylie, Conley, & Marks, 2002).

Foster (2004) conducted a study to show the need for more evidence of the

relationship between leadership and successful schooling. The perspectives of principals,

teachers, students, and parents were gathered through focus groups and individual

interviews over an eight-month period. There were sixteen female and fifteen male

participants. Field journals were and reviewed and transcriptions were read several times.

Participants reviewed transcriptions to ensure integrity of the data. Findings indicate that

the principal viewed leadership as a team working and sharing responsibilities to decrease

the risk of overload and burnout. Teachers viewed leadership as building relationships

and working collaboratively. They also viewed the principal as one who demonstrates

extraordinary interpersonal communication skills to build a collaborative culture.

Furthermore, they viewed the principal as one who understands how interpersonal

relationships are built and maintained. The students viewed leadership as being involved

in making decisions. Finally, the parents viewed leadership as simply making things

happen.

Historical Overview of Leadership Theories and Styles

Gessner (1999) compares leadership theories to that of fingerprints in that

everyone has one and no two are alike. It is beyond the reach of the study to give a

comprehensive review of all theories. Therefore, the researcher selected a few theories in

leadership styles as they relate to interpersonal communications skills of the principal.

The trait approach holds that leaders are born with certain personality traits that

set them apart from others, which allows them to lead. A fact that some research

historians use is that Alexander the Great was a greater leader than his father (Hargie &

Dickson, 2004). Hargie and Dickson also note that in the biblical times, the hand of God

was placed on certain individuals to rule. Young and French (1996) observe that those

American presidents polled as being successful were taller than those perceived as

failure. In today’s time, this theory receives little support. According to Bennis and

Goldsmith (1999), all can learn leadership.

After examining leadership theory from the trait approach, the rise to leadership

can be understood from the situational approach theory (Hersey & Blanchard, 1988).

This theory focuses on the situation and not the person. This theory differs from the trait

theory in that a person may be a dynamic leader in one situation and not in another.

Additionally, the interaction of the leader, the follower, and the situation determine the

leadership style that would be appropriate. The situation dictates the style of the

leadership needed. The four different leadership styles that encompass this theory are

telling, selling, participating, and delegating. Hersey and Blanchard explain that the

telling style of leadership is directed to those subordinates who are not likely to work

independently. They need constant direction. The selling leadership style is directed to

those who needed even more direction. Those who were more motivated and ready to

perform a task, the participation style of leadership is employed. Finally, the delegating

style is directed to those who are able to carry out task independently.

Building on the on the premise that effective leadership is a function of situational

variables, Fiedler (1967, 1986) found evidence that the type of leader to enhance group

performance was contingent on the nature of the situation in terms of three factors: (1)

leader and member relationship; (2) task structure; and (3) position of power. He further

explains that when leaders have good relationships with subordinates, tasks are well

structured, and they are in a powerful position within the group, they are most effective.

Thinking that is more recent is the transformational approach (Burns, 1978).

Burns focused more on the relationship of leaders and followers and made a distinction

between the transactional and transformation approach. Burns distinguished between the

two by noting that the transactional approach focuses on the exchange relationship

between the leader and the follower. In other words, a reward is given for services

rendered by the follower. The transformation approach as explained by Burns focuses on

the leaders’ interaction with followers in a way that motivates and aspires followers to

reach new heights. This approach has received some criticism (Tourish and Pinington,

2002). They argue that this approach allows the leader to exceed limits of power and

there is a lack of checks and balances.

The final approach shifts to how leaders conduct themselves when providing

leadership. A behavioral approach to consider is House’s (1971) path-goal theory.

House argued that a leader’s behavior could make a difference in the performance of

followers. From this approach, four leadership themes emerged: supportive, directive,

participative and achievement-oriented. In the supportive leadership, the needs of the

followers are considered through positive organizational climate. Directive leadership

entails specific guidance and communication. The participative leadership takes in

consideration the opinions and ideals of followers. The achievement-oriented leadership

allows the followers to achieve high standards as the leader sets the goals and instills

confidence in the followers.

Effective Leadership: Leadership Styles and Interpersonal Communication

Research shows that effective schools were the results of effective principals

(Leithwood, Seashore-Louis, Anderson and Wahlstrom, 2004). Leithwood et al. contend

that there are three basics practices that describe an effective leader. These three basic

practices are setting direction, developing people, and redesigning the organization. They

argue that principals that set clear and precise goals give teachers a sense of purpose and

identity. Developing people has been understood in the context of giving guidance to

teachers to improve classroom practices. Here it is understood as leader’s emotional

intelligence. They describe this term as the principal being cognizant of teacher needs.

The principal practices this concept by employing book studies, critical friend groups and

professional development sessions. Redesigning the school requires the principal to resist

pitfalls in education such as high-stake testing and financial rewards for achieving school

goals.

In this age of accountability, great demands are placed on schools to be effective

(NCLB). Edmonds (1979) correlates of effective schools set precedence for instructional

approaches to school leadership. In the initial movement of effective schools, the focus

was on helping students who did not do so well in school. The focus has now moved to

helping all students. Ron Edmonds first devised five correlates for effective schools: (a)

the leadership of the principal is characterized by substantial attention to the quality of

instruction; (b) there is a pervasive and broadly understood instructional focus; (c) an

orderly safe climate exists; (d) teachers behavior convey the expectation that all students

are to contain at least minimum mastery; and (e) pupil achievement is used as the

measure for program evaluation (1979a; 1979b; 1981). Edmonds explains that the term

correlate is used to convey that each ingredient is related to the other. They are

interactive, and they all are present in effective school. In time, the focus of the original

five correlates was divided into seven correlates that are widely accepted today. These

seven correlates are: (a) clearly stated and focused mission; (b) high expectation for

students, teachers, and administrators; (c) safe and orderly climate for learning; (d)

instructional leadership by all administrators and staff members; (e) opportunity to learn

and time-on-task; (f) frequent monitoring of student progress; and (g) positive

home/school relations.

Education has borrowed theories from the business world (Day, 2000). Day

further states that there needs to be more studies conducted gathering information from

leaders who are acknowledged as effective leaders in education leadership or from those

who know the business of education leadership. Through research conducted by the

National Association of Headteacher in the United Kingdom, Day attempts to understand

what makes an effective leader. Headteacher is equivalent to a principal.

For this study, twelve heads were selected from schools that had received good

inspection results from the Office of Standards in Education. Schools selected differed in

size, geographical background, and economic and sociocultural. Interviews were

conducted over a three-day period. The data revealed a similarity in responses as to why

these principals were successful: (1) they valued leadership as important; (2) people are

regarded as the center of their focus; (3) their goal was achievement; and (4) they were

good managers in time of crisis or dilemmas. Other responses that emerged from the data

are that these principals promoted a sense of care, equity, and encouragement.

Additionally, they promoted professional development of staff, a collaborative culture,

and effective use of intrapersonal and interpersonal skills. Furthermore, the data also

revealed that the Heads were busy building and maintaining a vision as opposed to

coordinating organizational activities. Day commented (2000) that if principals are not

relating to teachers in a way to develop them, then the school will not develop either. The

data revealed that developing teachers was a key focus for the Heads. It was also reported

that the Heads had a balance between power with and power over. In other words, the

Heads involved the teachers in decision-making, but they also made decision without the

staff as needed. Finally, and most important, all Heads demonstrated the human

dimension of leading: interpersonal trust, genuine respect, and effective listener.

Effective principals are builders of mutual trust, respect, openness, and positive

relationships with teachers and staff (Blase & Blase, 2001; Glickman, Gordon, Ross-

Gordon, 2001). Furthermore, principals are developers of positive climates that are

evidenced through collaboration, coaching, reflection and encouragement (Fullan, 1997).

Thus far, the researcher has presented findings that present interpersonal communication

skills in a positive light. There is much to learn from the dark side of education

administration within the context of interpersonal communication.

Keashly (1998) refers to mistreatment of teachers by principals as emotional

abuse. Emotional abuse entails verbal and nonverbal abuse. Examples of verbal abuse

may take the form of screaming, yelling, angry outbursts, put-downs, lying, threats of job

loss, unsolicited criticism of work abilities, dismissing an individual’s thoughts, not

returning phone calls, and fostering a master-servant relationship (Harlos & Pinder,

2000). Nonverbal abuse demonstrated by the principal entails silent treatment,

fingerpointing, slamming objects, throwing objects, eye gazing, and dirty looks (Namie

& Namie, 2000). This type of behavior that is demonstrated by the principal reduces

work effort, and increases absenteeism and no commitment on the part of the teacher

(Pearson, 2000). Yamada (2000) reports that psychological effects may occur such as

stress, depression, and loss of sleep, high blood pressure, and digestive problems. He

further argued that superior’s behavior will not get any better with the rise of diversity.

In the first empirical study of its kind, Blasé and Blasé (2002) conducted study

using grounded theory showing the dark side of education administration as it relates to

interpersonal skills of the principal as perceived by teachers. The researchers feared that

school districts would not grant permission to interview teachers for a study of this nature

and teachers feared disclosure. Because of this, they employed a snowball sampling,

which allows others to recommend teachers who may have experienced such abuse.

There were fifty teacher participants: five were males and 45 were females. Elementary,

middle, and high school levels were represented. In-depth interviews were conducted

with each participant.

Teachers reported that mistreatment was via face-to-face interactions naming the

most common offense was ignoring them especially in public places. Additionally,

teachers reported that principals attempted to isolate them from social contact with other

colleagues for collaboration and support. Another finding is that the principals

undermined efforts of teachers to involve him or her in professional development.

Furthermore, teachers reported that the principals intimidated them adding that pounding

on the desk and yelling all sorts of things. Both veteran and beginning teachers

experienced low-self esteem, which lead to a loss of confidence in their ability to teach.

Teachers described the school as a climate of fear.

Leadership styles are included in the category of leadership. Leadership style,

simply put, is defined as the “how what is done is done” (Hargie & Dickson, 2004, p.

431). Others regard leadership style as sets of measurable behaviors (Leithwood &

Duke, 1999, Richmond & Allison, 2003). In a classical study (Lewin, 1939) involving

juvenile boys in a recreational youth center, three types of leadership styles were

identified: autocratic (authoritarian), democratic (participation and interaction), and

laissez-faire (leaderless). The findings revealed that the authoritarian leadership style left

the boys dependent on the leader. As this is related to school principals, this type of

leadership will lead the teacher to be dependent on the principal and not be empowered to

be self-motivated. Taking the same group of boys and employing the democratic

leadership style, the boys showed an interest in the progress of the group. The principal

who employs this type of leadership style empowers the teachers to use their expertise for

the improvement of the school. From this study, implications are that teachers too will be

interested in the progress of the school when the principal employs a democratic

leadership style. Lewin grouped the boys without a leader. The boys lacked interest in

their task, which resulted in unfinished tasks. This also can be applied to teachers when

they are left without an effective leader. This classic study reveals that there must be

effective leadership if productivity is going to occur. A laissez-faire style of leadership

decreases productivity according to the study.

Empirical studies reveal that the principal’s leadership styles have an influence on

a teacher’s performance on the job (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2003). It is important to discuss

the different types of leadership styles of effective leaders according to research.

Nir and Kranot (2006) conducted research to connect transformational leadership

style to teacher effectiveness. Questionnaires were administered to elementary teachers

from 134 schools of which 79 participated. School principals gave permission to conduct

research in their schools. Research team members administered the questionnaire. The

researchers used a teachers self-efficacy measured Gibson and Dembo’s scaled (1984).

School principals’ leadership styles were measured using the Multifactor Questionnaire

developed by Avolio, Bass, and Dung (1996). The study findings were that

transformational leadership style was likely to increase job satisfaction for teachers, and

that this style of leadership supported teachers in their efforts to meet organizational

goals. This study was inconclusive in that it did not conduct study on other leadership

styles.

Successful leaders are faced with many challenges in interpersonal

communication (Ford, 2006). Ford explains that the principal controls the tone and flow

of interpersonal communication in the school setting. Therefore, if principals do not

demonstrate strong interpersonal communication skills, this will negatively affect the

confidence and trust that teachers have in their principals. Some leaders use their hands,

voice tone, leg movements, and facial expressions to relate messages. Ford iterates that

these types of communication styles must be used with care recognizing that success or

failure may be a result of these actions. Additionally, Ford argues that communication

style of the leader is the language of leadership. Effective leaders use a variety of

communications styles. Situational leaders will tend to employ a communication style

that is appropriate for the situation (Fiedler, 1967, 1986). Ford suggests emails,

memorandums, text messages, and newsletters.

Tyson (2006) argues that it is ludicrous to think that a principal can coordinate

professional development, build leadership capacity, and celebrate individual and

communal successes without master of interpersonal communication skills both verbal

and written. Tyson argues that an effective leader demonstrates effective interpersonal

communication. The effective leader demonstrates communication as relational. In other

words, the principal will try to understand the point of view of the teacher. Tyson iterates

that this will help in a successful exchange when the teacher feels the principal can relate

to what is being said. The effective leader demonstrates calmness when communicating

or interacting. He further states that when emotions are stirred, effective communication

is impossible. Emotions make it impossible to see the real situation or problem at hand.

The effective communicator must stay positive. When the principal demonstrate a

positive tone and disposition, this dispels any negativity. This makes the interpersonal

communication experience productive for teacher and principal. Furthermore, Tyson

argues that the effective communicator’s communication is mutually beneficial. The

principal’s job is not to judge, criticize, or tear down, but to build, act fairly, and serve as

a diplomat. Finally, the effective leader’s interpersonal communication is constructive.

The dialogue must be constructive. In other words, the principal must focus on where the

conversation is headed, lessons learned, consider implications, and set goals.

Climate and Interpersonal Communication

School climate is a general concept that captures the atmosphere of a school: it is

experienced by teachers and administrators, describes their collective perceptions of

routine behavior, and affects their attitudes and behavior (Hoy & Miskel, 2001). Rafferty

noted that the environment has long been recognized as a powerful influence on the

perceptions and behaviors of individuals (2003). He also argued that the climate sets the

tone for the school’s approach to resolving problems, trust and mutual respect, attitudes,

and generating new ideas. Positive school climate is one in which the behavior of both

teachers and principals is authentic; teachers and principals respect one another and are

straightforward with each other.

Rafferty (2003) conducted a research study that interpreted the relationship

between teacher perceptions and school climate as evidence by communications patterns

that developed. He combined the Organizational Description Questionnaire for

Secondary Schools (OCDQ-RS) (Hoy et al.) and the Communication Climate Inventory

(CCI) (Dennis, 1975). He also used work-related school issues as a framework. Two of

the primary categories represented in the OCDQ-RS are principal behaviors and teacher

behaviors. Two subtests from Dennis’s CCI were adapted to the high school contest and

employed to describe teachers’ perceptions of their opportunities for upward

communication and the principal’s supportiveness. School issues were categorized as

either strategic or work-related. The strategic objects are related to personnel

management functions and administrative policy. Work-related issues were items

pertaining to jobs to be performed and who will perform them.

There were forty-one secondary schools located in the western portion of Ohio.

The investigation involved 21 out of the 41 schools. There were 780 teachers,

counselors, and library-media specialists. The participating schools were required to: (1)

be comprised of twenty-two to forty certified teachers, counselors, and library-media

specialists in grades nine through twelve; (2) be comprehensive in curriculum; (3) be

under the jurisdiction of a county office of education; (4) be free of special influences

such as teacher association, contract negotiation; and (5) be approved by the principal.

Of the 821 survey instruments sent to the 26 principals for distribution, 503 teachers,

counselors, and media-specialists completed and returned the surveys. Scores and

deviations were computed. Participating schools were identified based on their overall

openness ranging from the most open climate school to most closed climate school.

The findings in this study revealed that there is a correlation between organizational

climate and communication as perceived by organization members. The presence of trust

and open communication between the teacher and the principal serve as the foundation of

day-to day operations and instructional practices in schools.

Leadership and Personality

Personality research is defined within the frame of The Five-Factor Model (FFM)

(Kornor & Nordvik, 2004). The FFM consist of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness,

Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (McCrae & Costa, 1999). McCrae and Costa

define personality trait as individual differences in patterns of thought, feelings, and

actions. They further explain the domains of the FFM. Neuroticism is defined as

emotional instability. Individuals worry about the unexpected and life’s problems. It

takes a long time for the person to bounce back to normalcy. Costa and McCrae

characterize Neuroticism by anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness,

impulsiveness, and vulnerability. Warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity,

excitement seeking, and positive emotions characterize extraversion. Openness represents

receptive to new ideas. It is characterized by fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actins, ideas,

and values. Additionally, Agreeableness is an individual’s eagerness to cooperate. Here

trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tender-mindedness are

descriptive of this domain. Finally, Conscientiousness describes an individual who is

dutiful, self-disciplined, and ambitious and a hard-worker.

In a research study conducted by Kornor and Nordvik (2004), findings show that

personality plays a role in leadership behavior. The purpose of the study was to

investigate relationships between the personality traits of FFM and leadership styles.

They used 106 Norwegian respondents of which 64 were males and 41 were females.

The respondents were leaders from a Norwegian School of Management, The national

Police Academy, and the Norwegian School of Business Administration. They were

given a 36-item questionnaire for the assessment of leadership behavior:

Change/Development, Production/Task/Structure, and Employee/Relations. Extraversion

and Openness were positively correlated, and Neuroticism was negatively correlated with

Change/Development, Production/Task/Structure, and Employee/Relations.

Agreeableness and Employee Relations, Extraversion and Conscientiousness were

positively correlated with all three leadership behaviors. Kormor and Norvik conclude

that personality traits are related to leadership styles.

Wanberg and Kammeyer-Mueller (2000) conducted a longitudinal study of 156

managers and found Extraversion and Openness to be positively related to proactive

behavior. They describe proactive behavior as taking the initiative to make one’s

environment better. They contended that this is a personality trait that is a major

characteristic of effective leaders.

Judge and Bono (2000) conducted study to link leader personality to

transformational leadership behavior. Participants were enrolled in community leadership

programs in the Midwest. There were 14 samples of leaders of in about 200 participating

organizations. The study did link Extraversion and Agreeableness to transformational

leadership. Neuroticism and Conscientiousness were unrelated to transformational

leadership.

Emotions and Interpersonal Communication

Emotions play a crucial role in leadership practices (Rubin, Muntz, and Brommer,

2005). They further iterate not everyone utilizes emotion stimuli in ways that are

beneficial to the organization. Emotional Intelligence (EI) refers to the ability to

understand the emotions of others and to use that understanding to solve problems

(Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey, 1999). It takes skills to be able to discern the emotions of

others. Perceiving emotions through one’s facial expressions, body language, pictures, or

music, perceiving one’s thoughts through emotions, understanding another’s emotions,

and managing emotions are skills that principals need to become effective

communicators in understanding the emotions of others. (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, and

Sitarenios, 2003). These skills are descriptive of transformational leadership and since

transformation leaders are interested in meeting the needs of followers, perceiving

emotions skillfully is an avenue in fulfilling this task. (Ashkanasy & Tse, 2000).

When leaders are able to recognize the emotions of subordinates, they also

discern true feelings (Rubin, Munz, and Bommer, 2005). True feelings manifest

themselves through face, body language, and voice of the individual. The ability to

decode accurately the feelings of others is a very important social skill (Nowicki and

Duke, 2001). The leaders’ ability to build relations and to inspire others is dependent on

this skill (Caruso, Mayer, and Salovey, 2002). They feel that this is the reason why

leaders should stay in tune with the emotions of their followers.

Transformational leaders are likely to use emotions to communicate vision and

motivate followers (Lewis, 2000). Consistent with this line of thinking, George (2000)

adds that leaders communicate with followers in such a manner to arouse emotions.

In a study conducted by Rubin, Munz, and Brommer (2005), 145 managers or

leaders from the Midwest biotechnology/agricultural company were surveyed to examine

the ability of a leader to recognize the emotions of followers and how it influenced

transformational leadership behavior. The study revealed that emotion recognition

predicted transformational leadership behavior. Additionally, the study reported that

transformational leaders are more interpersonally sensitive than those of other leadership

behaviors.

More Research Studies

The study, Making Sense of Leading Schools (Portin, Schneider, DeArmond, &

Gundlach, 2003) from the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE), conveys that

leadership is a shared experience affording leadership needs to be met in a variety of

ways. The study consisted of principals, assistant principals, and teachers in 21 schools.

These schools were private, public, elementary, secondary, traditional, and charter

schools. Portin, the lead researcher, says that the findings show that the one-size-fits-all is

not beneficial to the development of the principal or the school. Additionally, the study

findings indicate that all principals need not get the same training or attend the same

workshops due to different leadership styles. Portin further argues that leadership should

not be treated as a “uniform proposition.” There were five major conclusions drawn from

the study: (1) the heart of the principal’s job lies in diagnosis. The principal determines

the needs of his or her school; (2) disregarding the type of school, principals must focus

on leadership needs in seven areas; instructional, cultural, managerial, human resources,

strategic, external development, and micro-political; (3) Principals need to make sure that

leadership is happening in all seven areas and understand that they don’t have to provide

it by themselves; (4) Principals should be granted governance over budgets, and staffing,

and (5) Principals think that they learned the skills they need on the job. Job skills were

learned on the job not in leadership training.

The professional development of principals is crucial to successful leadership

(Davis, Darling-Hammond, & LaPointe, 2006). In a 2005 study conducted by Stanford

School of Education, a team of researchers examined the professional development

programs of both pre-service and in-service school principals. They examined different

programs based on the literature on effective schools. Qualitative and survey data was

collected. Samples of principals were drawn from the National Association of Secondary

School Principals and the National Association of Elementary School Principals. Their

findings showed that the programs examined focused on leading teachers and improving

instruction, building a collaborative community, and providing and communicating

positive feedback to teachers. The programs differed in that some focused on the

principal as a learner and others focused on the principal as a leader.

Pashiardis (2000) conducted a research study with four main goals: to find out

about the leadership of their principal; to find out about how the principal sees herself in

regards to leadership style; to compare teachers perceptions with those of the principal;

and to find out if there are any discrepancies between the views of the two groups of

people. The author began with the assumptions that the effectiveness of a leader is mainly

dependent on how others view him and how the principals view themselves as leaders.

According to Pashiardis, the assumption is that principals act and perform their duties

based on these ideas and based on their perceptions of themselves as leaders.

The researcher used a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. A

questionnaire was constructed and pilot-tested regarding a principal’s duties and style of

leadership. This was conducted in Cyrus in a secondary school. A Likert-type scale was

used with intervals from 1-4. Statistical analyses were collected using SPSS descriptive

statistics such as means, medians, standard deviations and frequencies. In addition,

principals were observed, shadowed, and interviewed.

The name of the school was kept confidential to protect the identity of the school

and its population. The setting was an urban school with about 700 students and 62

teaching personnel, and one principal. The principal is a 50-year-old female with 3 of

administrative experience and 25 years of classroom experience. She is required to teach

about six 45-minute periods per week. Cyprus is a highly centralized, bureaucratic system

where the Ministry of Education provides the curriculum.

Results showed that both teachers and principal felt that the school had a positive

and humane climate. According to the results, the principal scored the lowest mark in the

area of interpersonal relationships as perceived by her teachers. The teachers perceived

her as not being open where the principal perceived herself as being the opposite.

Additionally, the principal was being perceived as one who does not clearly

communicate expectations. The researchers suggested that the principal needed to

investigate further the views of the teachers and try to find out how and to what extent are

teachers aware of performance expectations. The principal received fairly good marks as

being a good communicator with parents and building relations between the community

and school. As for personal development and in-service, the faculty thought that the

principal rarely used her own training for her personal development and her staff’s

improvement.

Pashiardis suggested that the principal needed to make her expectations more

clear, use in-service and staff development more widely, and listen to and accept different

views and approaches other than her own (2001)..

The ability to work collaboratively is now a requisite in school leadership ( Slater,

2005). The leader agrees that it must be done, but the know-how poses a problem. When

a leader does build a collaborative climate, he or she is referred to as a facilitator,

supporter and a reinforcer (Beatty, 2000). Most leaders have not learned to relinquish

control in order to build a collaborate climate (Blase and Blasé, 2001).

Collaboration involves an emotional component. Slater (2005) conducted study

to analyze the emotional components involved in collaboration. The study was qualitative

in nature and used a purposive sampling. Sixteen people participated in two focus

groups. Participants were principals, assistant principals, parents, and teachers. Results

were significant. Data reveals that the supporter leader is concern with healthy

interpersonal relationships. Collaboration is emotional in that it requires commitment and

trust (Emihovich and Battaglia, 2000). The participants also identified communication

behaviors that support collaborative climate such as listening and openness. The

participants shared that principals never listen and often time do not solicit the input from

others. Openness is truthful sharing and disclosure of information. When principals can

be open, this is the beginning of building trust (Kouzes and Posner, 1999). Another

finding is that principals do not value people. Principals do not take the input of others to

solve problems or make decisions. Another revelation is that principals do not understand

the feelings of others. They felt that principals should sense how one feels and respect

the views of others. Participants also felt that principals should be able to manage his or

her emotions. Individuals who know their emotions know are aware of self-value.

(Goleman, 1998). One key factor that the participants expressed was the building of

relationships as the building block of a collaborative climate and a successful school.

Summary

The body of research compiled in this literature review revealed that interpersonal

communication is a necessary ingredient in all facets of life particularly for those in

leadership. The importance of interpersonal communications has been viewed from

ancient times to present. Models of communication have been instrumental in

understanding the process of interpersonal communications.

Throughout history, the field of interpersonal communications has emerged into

an important domain of human behavior and has crossed into other domains as well:

business, and education. Interpersonal communication plays a role in leadership and

styles, personality, climate and culture, and emotions. The literature has shown how

effective leadership strengthens performance of subordinates. It has also shown that most

leaders do not value effective interpersonal communications as a means of improving

organizational goals.

The literature lacks a consensus among researchers as to what constitutes essential

interpersonal communication skills that promote effective teacher performance. There is

a need to determine which interpersonal communication skills as perceived by teachers

are most effective and essential in increasing teaching performance. There is an even

greater need to establish and understand the role that these skills may play in the principal

teacher dyad in promoting effective teacher performance.

This study is important to the principal, because it will result in increased

awareness of which essential and most effective interpersonal communication skills

promoted teacher performance.

Table 1

Research Studies Related to Leadership Styles & Personalities

Study Purpose Participants Design Outcome

Judge &

Bono (2003) To link

personality to

transformation

leadership &

behavior

24 managers

from Questionnaires

and surveys Extraversion and

agreeableness were

linked to

transformational

leadership

Kornor &

Nordvik

(2004)

To examine the

relationship

between Five

Factor Model of

and leadership

behaviors

64 males and

41 females

from a

Norwegian

school of

Management

36-item

questionnaire Personality plays a

role in leadership

behavior:

extraversion &

openness were

positively correlated;

and neuroticism was

negatively correlated

with change,

development,

production, task, and

structure.

Wamberg &

Mueller

(2000)

To examine

personality and

leader behavior

156 managers Longitudinal Extraversion &

Openness are

positively related to

proactive behavior of

the leader.

Nir &

Kranot

(2006)

To examine the

relationship

between

leadership styles

and teacher

effectiveness

participants:

teachers,

principals and

students

Questionnaires Transformation

leadership increases

job satisfaction,

supports teacher

efforts. Study did

consider other

leadership styles.

Lewin

(1939) To examine the

affects of

leadership styles

on teaching and

learning

Youth

juvenile boys Findings show that

leaders who

demonstrate

authoritarian

leadership leave

subordinates

dependent on them;

democratic leadership

style motivates

interest in goals and

vision of the

organization; laissez-

faire- leadership

produces no gains in

productivity from

subordinates.

Table 2

Research Studies Related to Effective Leadership

Study Purpose Participants Design Outcome

Pashiardis

(2000) To examine the

effectiveness of

leadership

1 female

principal & 62

teachers

Questionnair

es and

interviews

The principal scored high

in positive school climate.

Teachers rated her low in

interpersonal

communication, not open

to suggestions

Portin,

Schneider,

DeArmond

, Gundlach

(2003)

To explore the

development of

effective

leaders

21particpants:

principals,

assistant

principals in

private, public

and charter

schools

Surveys One size fits all is not

beneficial to principal and

school. All principals

need same training due to

leadership styles. The

principal determines the

need of his or her school.

The heart of the principal

is job diagnosis.

Davis,

Darling-

Hammond,

&LaPointe,

(2005)

To examine

professional

development

programs of

principals

Pre-service and

in-service

programs for

principals

Qualitative

and

quantitative

Surveys and

interviews

Most programs focused

on leading teachers and

improving instruction;

building a collaborative

community & positive

feedback to teachers.

Some focused on

principal as learners while

others focused on

principals as leaders

Day (2000) To identify

what makes an

effective leader

12 Heads or

principals Quantitative Findings revealed that

effective principals value

leadership and put people

at the center of focus.

They view goal as

achievement.

Foster

(2004) To examine the

relationship

between

leadership &

successful

schooling

Principals,

teachers,

students

16 females

15 males

Qualitative

design

Interviews

Journal &

field work

Successful schooling is

synonomous with

building relationship;

working collaboratively;

extraordinary

interpersonal skills;

maintain interpersonal

relationship; and making

decisions making thins

happen.

Table 3

Research Studies Related to Leadership and Humanistic Approach

Study Purpose Participants Design Outcome

Slater

(2005)

Analyze the

emotional

components

involved in

collaboration in

the principal-

teacher dyad

16 participants:

principals,

assistant

principals &

teachers.

Qualitative and

purpose

sampling

Collaboration

involves emotion

such as commitment,

trust, listening, &

openness. Teachers

perceived principals

as poor listeners, &

do not understand

feelings of others. If

principals are to

create a collaborative

community, they

must be able to build

relationships.

Blasé &

Blasé

(2002)

To examine

interpersonal

communications

behaviors of

education

administrators:

the darker side

45 females and 5

males

elementary,

middle, and high

school teachers.

Ground theory

In-depth

interviews

Most interactions

were face-to-face.

Principals intimidated

teachers by yelling

and pounding on the

table; they isolated

teachers from

colleagues; and the

undermined the

efforts of teachers

Kacmar,

Zivnuska,

Witt, &

Gully

(2003)

To test the

hypothesis that

high frequency

leader &

subordinate

interaction

moderates the

relationship

between leader

and member

exchange

254 employees of

an distribution

company

Quantitative Those who had

frequent interpersonal

communication with

supervisors got good

ratings and feedback.

When

communication

between supervisor

and subordinate did

not occur frequently,

ratings and feedback

was not favorable.

Study Purpose Participants Design Outcome

Gaziel; (2003) To examine

principal

effectiveness and

perception

21 school

principals and

teachers from

elementary,

middle, & high

schools

Quantitative and

Qualitative Perception is a good

predictor of leadership

effectiveness. When the

leaders value

relationships, feelings, and

lead through

empowerment, success is

the result. Perception

plays a vital role in

performance.

Rosenbaum

(2001) To examine the

role of listening

on performance

1000 sale people

from businesses Quantitative Listening effectively

defines success

Goby & Lewis

(2000) Insurance

Industry Quantitative Listening was the primary

skill for success

Taylor, Cook,

Green, & Rogers

(1988)

Examine the

effects of

training

principals on

interpersonal

communication

skill of listening.

4 principals

3 males and 1

female

Single case

design took place

in 4 phases

Listening is a vital skill in

teacher improvement.

After the principals were

trained in listening,

teachers viewed principals

as being more attentive.

Principals were more

effective in establishing

instructional goals.

Rubin, Munz, &

Brommer(2005) To examine the

ability of a leader

to recognize

emotions of

subordinates its

on affects on

transformation

leadership

behavior

145 managers

from a Midwest

biotechnology

company

Surveys Emotions recognition

predicted transformation

leadership.

Transformation leaders are

more sensitive than other

leadership behaviors.

Table 4

Research Studies Related to Interpersonal Communication and Leadership

Study Purpose Participants Design Outcome

Rafferty (2003) To examine school

climate and

interpersonal

communication

patterns

780 teachers,

counselors, and

media-specialists

Quantitative

Organizational

Description

Questionnaire

There is a

correlation be-

tween

organizational

climate and

communication.

Trust &* open

communication

be-tween

teacher &

principal serves

as a good

foundation of

day to day

operations &

instructional

practice.

Charter Institute

of Personnel &

Development &

Training School

To examine skills

needed to for

organizational

success

Managers &

supervisors from

various businesses

Questionnaire The findings

ranked

interpersonal

communication

as seventh most

important skills

in organization.

Department of

Labor SCANS

Report(1992)

To examine skills

that are needed for

the workplace

Public employers,

managers, union

officials, line

workers across the

United States

Longitudinal Study Findings

identified

interpersonal

skills as being

vital in

succeeding in

the workplace.

Such skills as

collaboration,

team player,

teaching others,

serving others,

leading others,

working with

divers groups,

and negotiating.

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. This

research was valuable since it is widely accepted that teachers have a direct impact on

student success and achievement (Blanton, 2006). This study explored this facet of

teachers’ perception to discover which interpersonal communication skills are most

effective in teacher performance, thus affecting student performance.

The literature has evidenced the importance and the necessity that leaders

demonstrate interpersonal communication skills in an organization. Education literature is

replete with the concept that an effective principal is the key figure in creating effective

schools through effective interpersonal communication skills. Other areas of study that

surfaced from the literature review were leadership and personality, and leadership and

gender.

In this chapter, the research design, participants, sampling procedures,

instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis, were discussed and concluded with a

brief summary.

Research Questions

The primary focus of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills and to understand the role these skills play

in teacher performance. It was important to understand the role that these skills may play

since teacher performance was directly related to student achievement and success.

The overarching question of this study was this: what role does interpersonal

communication skills of the principal play in teacher performance? The following

questions also guided the research:

1. Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact teacher

performance in the school setting?

2. How does teachers’ perception of their principal affect teacher performance?

Population

The population for this research study included teachers from northeastern

Georgia schools. The operating budget for this northeastern district is $108,777,454.00.

For each student, $9,616.00 is spent. Sixty-three percent of the budget is devoted to

instruction. The district employed 902 teachers, 522 of whom possessed advanced

degrees, 13 years of average experience, 232 paraprofessionals, and 12,108 enrolled

students. Of these students enrolled, there are 2% Asians, 55% African-Americans, 18%

Hispanics, 21% White, and 3% Multiracial.

The district housed 13 elementary schools, 11 middle schools, and 11 high

schools. Only five schools were included in this study: two high schools, two middle

schools, and one elementary school. Demographics for each school that participated have

been charted in Chapter 4.

Participants

The researcher interviewed five teachers from northeast Georgia schools. Three

school levels were represented: elementary, middle, and high school. The researcher

sought certified teachers of any age group who taught from K-12 grades. Classroom

experience ranged from novice teacher to veterans. All teachers were employed in a

public school and they were employed by the school district where research was

conducted. The researcher sought a diverse group of teachers that differed in gender, age

and ethnicity. Teacher participants were teachers of various subjects. The rationale for

such a diverse group was to get various perspectives.

Sample

Random sampling was used in selecting participants for this research. Upon the approval

from the IRB (Institutional Review Board), the researcher put the names of all schools in

the district in boxes according to levels labeled elementary schools- A, middle schools-

B, and high schools- C. There were 35 schools: 13 elementary schools, 11 middle

schools, and 11 high schools. The researcher pulled from each box until ten schools from

each level had been randomly selected. From those ten schools randomly pulled, the

researcher emailed 150 letters seeking teacher participants for face-to-face interviews.

Teacher participants were provided information concerning this research project and a

demographic survey sheet. The researcher received responses from three high schools,

four middle schools, and three elementary schools conveying willingness to participate.

The researcher gathered those teacher responses and placed them in boxes labeled:

elementary schools A, middle schools B, and high schools C. Two names per school level

were selected randomly from the boxes. These teacher participants were contacted

through email to set up an interview time and place. One high school teacher participant

self-eliminated. This left a remaining number of five participants. Then the researcher

repeated the process of randomly pulling from the remaining teacher responses in an

effort to replace the participant who self-eliminated

Research Design and Instrumentation

The research design for this study was autoethnography. This is a qualitative

research method where self is used as a source of data (Duncan, 2004). Autoethnography

is a form of ethnography research. With its roots in anthropology, ethnography began in

the 1900’s. Duncan states the difference between autoethnography and ethnography:

The essential differences between ethnography and

autoethnography are that in an autoethnography, the

researcher is not trying to become an insider in the research

setting. He or she, in fact, is the insider. The context is his

or her own (p. 3).

Hayano (1979) coined the term autoethnography in 1979. It describes research

studies of a personal nature (Ellis & Bochner, 2000). Danahay (1997) defines

autoethnography as a research method that connects the person to the culture. This

means that the researcher places himself or herself within the social context. Pelias

(2003) says it “lets you use yourself to get to the culture” (p. 372).

Wall (2006) suggests that if the researcher’s voice is not included in the research,

then the research is minimized to just a summary of what others have said. The

researchers as well as other participants revealed emotions, stories, dialogues, documents,

and personal reflections and testimonies (Ellis & Bocher, 2000).

This method of inquiry has been widely criticized (Sparkes 2000; Atkinson,

1997). Sparkes argues that when the researcher is the only source of data, the researcher

is criticized as being self-indulgent. Atkinson states:

The narratives seem to float in a social vacuum.

The voices echo in an otherwise empty world.

There is an extraordinary absence of social context, social

action and social interaction (p. 339).

Philaretou and Allen (2006) point out that validity and reliability are very

important in qualitative autoethnography research since they depend on the accuracy of

the researcher’s memory to reconstruct events. Kleinman and Copp (1993) suggest that

personal issues do create awareness. At the same time, the researcher of autoethnography

may be exposed to hurtful and embarrassing issues.

Research studies that deal with perceptions, attitudes, or opinions are well suited

for qualitative research methods (Ellis & Bochner, 2000). This specific design was

appropriate for this study because it allowed the researcher to be an insider sharing

personal experiences as well as the testimonies, stories, and experiences of others (Ellis

& Bocher, 2000). Much was learned through this design that traditional methods may not

offer. This design was significant in that personal testimonies, experiences, stories and

reflections revealed much more that traditional surveys.

Data Collection

The primary method of collecting data for this study was through structured one-on-

one interviews. Such data as dialogues, documents, stories, and personal reflections and

testimonies were collected to address research questions for this study. Confidentiality of

participants was maintained in compliance with IRB requirements.

This was a qualitative study, including authoethnographic mode of inquiry.

Authoethnography is a qualitative research method where self is a source of data

(Duncan, 2004). It describes research studies of a personal nature (Ellis & Bochner,

2000). They further explain that the researcher’s style of writing is highly personal using

his/her own experiences to better understand events in society. According to Ellis and

Bochner, this method was more suitable for this study in that the researcher gave voice to

the study and shared invaluable inside knowledge that was not expressed through

traditional forms of inquiry. Additionally, the researcher acted as both subject and

participant in that she shared a full descriptive account of her experiences.

The researcher sought approval from Georgia Southern University‘s IRB to

conduct research. Upon the approval from the IRB, the researcher put the names of all

schools in the district in boxes according to levels labeled: elementary schools A, middle

schools B, and high schools C. There were 35 schools: 13 elementary schools, 11 middle

schools, and 11 high schools. The researcher pulled from each box until ten schools from

each level had been randomly selected. From those ten schools randomly pulled, the

researcher emailed 150 teachers from school email list, seeking teacher participants to

schedule face-to-face interviews. Teacher participants were provided information

concerning this research project and a demographic survey sheet. The researcher received

responses from three high schools, four middle schools, and three elementary school that

conveyed that they would participate. The researcher gathered those teacher responses

and placed them in boxes labeled: elementary schools- A, middle schools- B, and high

schools- C. Two names per school level were selected randomly from the boxes. These

teacher participants were contacted through email to set up interview times and place.

One high school teacher participant self-eliminated. This left a total number of five

participants. Then the researcher repeated the process of randomly pulling from the

remaining teacher responses in an effort to replace the participant who self-eliminated.

The participant was not replaced because the remaining teachers from the sample were

involved in other activities that prevented their participation. All participants received

proper information concerning this research according to IRB guideline. Participants’

permission forms were signed at the time of the interview. Interviews were audio-taped

with permission of the participants. The researcher chose to conduct interviews away

from the school to protect the identities of the participants. Interviews lasted

approximately 45-60 minutes.

Furthermore, personal experiences of the researcher allowed the researcher to

become a participant. The researcher integrated experiences and dialogue throughout the

research as it became relevant. The researcher was careful not to influence the response

of the participants. Furthermore, the researcher became a participant in sharing personal

experiences.

The researcher followed the interview procedures as outline by Leedy and Omrod

(2001). Setting up the interview was done in a timely manner and convenient for the

participants. All interviews were confirmed in writing. About five days before the

interviews, reminder notices were sent through email or standard mail. The researcher

obtained permission to tape the interview sessions. Notes were transcribed in a Microsoft

Word document using IBM Via Voice.

In addition, the researcher employed an experienced panel of six teachers of

various grade levels. These teachers had thirty or more years of teaching experience in

the public system, and were well-trained practioners in the field. These experienced

teachers were drawn from a cohort of Georgia Southern University doctoral students in

the Educational Administration program. This experienced panel of teachers aided the

researcher in developing questions for the interviews.

After a list of questions was generated, the researcher emailed the questions to the

methodologist for his view, comments and approval. Then, the methodologist emailed his

approval of ten interview questions that he believed would aid the researcher in

addressing the research.

Data Analysis

Data analysis is the process of searching and arranging data into manageable parts

(Jacelon & O’Dell, 2005). Marshall & Rossman (1999) characterize data analysis as the

process of constructing order and interpretation of collected data. The following steps

were used to analyze the data: The researcher organized data by using index cards, file

folders. The index cards were used for note taking during interviews. The researcher

documented reoccurring themes that she thought were major points of interest discussed

by participants. These were filed into small file folders with a theme written on them.

This allowed the data to be broken down into smaller manageable units. The researcher

continued to revisit audiotapes, notes, words and stories of the participants. Other themes

were added as some were deleted from the small file. The researcher’s own knowledge

and perceptions allowed her to identify common themes in the data. Some of the themes

were deleted as others were added. The researcher kept records of revelations. A

recording strategy of keeping memos was employed. A memo is conversing with self

about what has occurred in the research process (Jacelon & O’Dell, 2000). The researcher

spoke into a digital recorder to guard thoughts and interpretations of the data. The

recordings were revisited many times to gain understanding of the data. As the

recordings, stories, and small file folders were revisited, it was then that themes were

clearly revealed. The themes from the data were verbal/face-to-face, written

communication, feedback, trust, support, care, respect, and worth. Each participant

consistently expressed thoughts concerning these themes. After all information had been

written on index cards and transferred to small file folders, the researcher typed

information into a chart to review themes and how they connected to the review of

literature (Table VII).

Participants were invited to review statements and stories rendered to ensure the

validity and reliability of the study. All audiotaped interviews were transcribed by using

IBM Via Voice and again participants were given the opportunity to review audiotapes of

the interview to ensure validity of the study.

Reporting the Data

The researcher reported data through a personal narrative style of writing,

drawing on her personal experiences as well as the experience of others. In addition, the

researcher created tables to report the data and used captions to explain findings.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. The

overarching question was what role does interpersonal communication of the principal

play in teacher performance? The following sub-questions also guided the research:

1. What interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact

teacher performance in the school setting?

2. Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do principals believe impact

teacher performance in the school setting?

The focus here was to gain knowledge and meaning from the participants’

experiences in their own words as well as the narrative account from the researcher. The

research was conducted by interpreting personal documents such as letters or notes,

recollections of events, interviews, self –statements (personal testimonies), self-

revelations, and self-perceptions.

CHAPTER 4

REPORT OF DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS

Introduction

The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance.

Five teachers were interviewed to gain knowledge about their principals’ interpersonal

communication skills and the role these skills play in their performance. These five

teachers were elementary, middle, and high school teachers from northeast Georgia

schools. This study did not focus on race, gender, or age.

Interpersonal communication in regards to this study refers to listening, feedback,

face-to-face communication, nonverbal cues, trust and authenticity in the principal-

teacher dyad.

The researcher sought approval from Georgia Southern University’s IRB to

conduct research. After permission was granted, the researcher began to select randomly

participants from schools located in northeast Georgia. The researcher put the names of

all schools in the district in boxes according to levels labeled: elementary schools A,

middle schools B, and high schools C. The researcher pulled from each box until ten

schools from each level had been randomly selected. From those ten schools randomly

pulled, the researcher emailed 150 letters seeking teacher participants for face-to-face

interviews. Teacher participants were provided with information concerning this

research project and a demographic survey sheet. The researcher received three high

school, four middle school, and three elementary school responses that conveyed their

willingness to participate. The researcher gathered those teacher responses and placed

them in boxes again labeled according to level. Two names per school level were selected

randomly from the boxes. These teacher participants were contacted through a written

letter and email to set up an interview time and place. Participants also received written

confirmation of scheduled interviews and a follow-up call as a reminder of the interview.

One participant self-eliminated after the interview had taken place. Then the researcher

repeated the process of randomly pulling from the remaining teacher responses in an

effort to replace the participant who self-eliminated. Those remaining teacher

respondents did not want to participate. Participants’ permission forms were signed at

the time of the interviews.

Interviews were not conducted during school time nor on school property. This

protected the identity of the participants. Steps were taken to make sure all participants

understood the Participant Informed Consent Form before interviews were conducted.

Interviews were audio-taped with participants’ permission, and participants were

permitted to read all transcription to ensure accuracy of testimonies.

All audiotaped interviews were transcribed using IBM Via Voice. The data were

organized into common themes, thoughts, or ideas that emerged from the interviews.

Research Questions

The overarching question of this study is this: what role do interpersonal communication

skills of the principal play in teacher performance? The following subquestions will also

guide the research:

1. Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact teacher

performance in the school setting?

2. How does the teachers’ perception of their principal affect teacher performance?

Research Design

This is a qualitative design and is termed autoethnography. Ellis and Bochner

describe it as being an evocative, personal narrative focusing on the academic life as well

as the personal life of the author. Its purpose is embedded in understanding self as lived

in a cultural context (2000). Danahay defines autoethnography as a research method that

connects the person to the culture (1997). Normally, autoethnographical writings are in

the first person voice in the form of short stories, poems, journals, novels or dialogue.

I employed this research design because it gave me the opportunity to contribute

to my profession in a personal and natural way and within the life stories of others. Holy

explains that this is not a traditional method and is not seen as being reliable or rigorous

(2003). Nevertheless, my own experiences were a rich source of data as were the

experiences of others. This design was most effective in that I and the other participants

were able to relate similar and somewhat different experiences, and in the process, self

was improved. My struggles, pains, and joys as well as those of the participants were

exposed in an effort to improve the environment in which we work. With this in mind,

the effort and time invested in this study was a worthwhile endeavor.

Respondents: Five Northeast Georgia Teachers

The respondents included five teachers possessing degrees beyond a Bachelors.

The ethnic makeup of these five teachers was one African American female (AA), two

white females (W), one female who did not reveal her origin, and one white male.

Teachers were classified as Mary, Betty, Janet, Molly, and David. The average

experience in the field of education was 22 years (see Table 5).

Table 5

Teacher Demographic Profile

Teacher School

Level Gender Race Highest

Degree Yrs. Exp.

Mary High Female W M 13

Betty Middle Female W M 3

Janet Elementary Female W M 30

Molly Middle Female AA Ed.S. 15

David High Male W M 10

W:White, M:Masters, AA:African-American, ED.S.:Specialist

Demographic Profile of Schools

The demographic profile represents the five schools where the participants teach.

The participants spoke of previous experiences that may not be associated with the

schools represented in the chart. This information is also presented in Table II.

Mary’s school is a high school serving 1514 students in a suburban area. The

racial/ethnic comparison of students revealed 54.6% African American, 31.7% White,

10.2% Hispanic, 0.1% American Indian, 2.5% Asian. There are 51.7% males and 48.3%

females. Of the school’s student population, 41.4% qualified for reduced or free lunch.

There are 110 teachers with 72 holding advanced degrees. Average years of teaching for

the faculty was 12.

Betty’s school is a middle school serving 541 students in a rural area. The

racial/ethnic comparison of students showed 55.6% African American, 20.7% White,

18.7% Hispanic, 0.2% American Indian, 1.8% Asian. There were 47.9% males and

52.1% females. The school reported 70.1% of its student population qualified for reduced

or free lunch. There were 47 teachers, 25 of whom hold advanced degrees. Average years

of teaching were 15.

Janet’s school is an elementary school serving 429 students in a rural area. The

racial/ethnic comparison of students reflected 62.9% African American, 42% White,

24.0% Hispanic, 0.7% American Indian, 0.2% Asian. There were 49.2% males and

50.8.% females. The school has 40.1% of its student population on reduced or free lunch.

Advanced degrees are held by 34 of the school’s 53 teachers. Average years of teaching

were 10.

Molly’s school is a middle school serving 655 students in a rural area. The

racial/ethnic population of the students was 64.7% African American, 23.2% White,

10.2% Hispanic, 9.5% American Indian, 0.5% Asian. There are 51.0% males and 49.0%

females. The school reported 73.4% of its student population on reduced or free lunch.

There are 58 teachers, 34 of whom hold advanced degrees. Average years of teaching

were 10.

David’s school is a high school serving 1588 students in a suburban area. The

racial/ethnic comparison of student population showed 56.9% African American, 9.8%

White, 24.0% Hispanic, 0.7% American Indian, 0.2% Asian. There are 49.2% males and

50.8% females. The school has 92.6% of its student population on reduced or free lunch.

There are 90 teachers with 34 holding advanced degrees. Average years of teaching were

10.

Table 6

Demographic Profile of Schools

Sch L CO TE AD AY STD AA W HIS AMI AS RL MA FE

Mary H SU 110 72 12 1514 54.6% 31.7% 10.2% 0.1% 2.5% 41.4% 51.7% 48.3%

Betty M RU 47 25 15 541 55.6% 20.7% 18.7% 0.2% 1.8% 70.1% 47.9% 52.1%

Janet E RU 53 34 10 429 62.9% 42.0% 24.0% 0.7% 0.2% 40.1% 49.2% 50.8%

Molly M RU 58 34 10 655 64.7% 23.2% 9.5% 0.2% 0.5% 73.4% 51.0% 49.0%

David H SU 90 34 10 1588 56.9% 9.8% 24.0% 0.7% 0.2% 92.6% 49.2% 50.8%

Sch:school, L=Level, CO:Community, RU:Rural, SU:Suburban, TE:teacher, M:Middle,

H:High, E:Elementary, AD:Advanced Degrees, STD:Student, AY:Average Years of

Experience, AA:African American, W:White, HIS:Hispanic, AMI:American Indian,

AS:Asian, RL:Reduced Lunch or Free Lunch, MA:Male, FE:Female

Qualitative Data Analysis

The question came to mind as to how I was going to recruit teacher participants to

discuss their current or previous administrators with a perfect stranger. Professionally,

teachers are skeptical about discussing their administrators or their schools. With this in

mind, I was thankful to anyone who responded to my email concerning this study.

My focus was to recruit teachers from the elementary, middle, and high school levels.

Northeast Georgia area was chosen for the convenient sample. Selecting participants

based on personal demographics did not fit in the purpose of the study even though

demographics may reveal pertinent information.

Five teachers agreed to be interviewed by responding affirmatively to a letter

requesting participation after I gained Georgia Southern University Institutional Review

Board (IRB) approval. After participants agreed to be interviewed, I contacted the

participants by their personal telephones and personal emails to schedule interviews. All

interviews were conducted away from school premises. Participants requested early

evenings as the best time to schedule interviews. A panel of expert teachers from Georgia

Southern University developed interview questions in an effort to address the research

questions of the study.

The interview sessions were conducted in a timely manner. Teacher participants

were free to discuss current or previous principals and to compare principal to principal.

Positive experiences as well as negative experiences were shared between the participants

and me.

The data derived from the interviews were presented to correspond with the

research questions of this study. Data were presented in autoethnography format and

followed by brief discussions of themes, patterns, insights, thoughts, and reflections that

emerged from the interactive interviews. My personal account was narrated through

interludes. In this study, I wanted to employ a nontraditional touch such as

autoethnograhy. More importantly, I wanted to crystallize my findings. Crystallization

takes place with the reflecting and refraction of light being dispersed in different

directions in a prism (Denzin & Lincoln 2003). Likewise, in this study, I have reflected

on the stories of the participants, which led me to consider my own interpersonal

communication skills as a teacher leader. I have compared and contrasted their stories

with mine and with each other’s in an effort to find meaning in the culture of education as

it relates to interpersonal communication skills of principals.

After collecting the data, I reread it as many times as necessary. Then I began to

see common themes emerge. I pondered if it would be best to organize the data by

teacher or by theme. The themes that were identified from the interviews were

verbal/fact-to face communication, written communication, feedback, sensitivity, care,

support, worth and trust. I thought it to be more expedient to organize data according to

these themes that reflect the research questions in narrative form interjecting my thoughts

and personal experiences through the use of interludes. This is where autoethnography

proved to be the best method for this type of research study (Duncan, 2004).

The researcher created an Item Analysis Chart (Table 3) to show the frequency of

reoccurring themes. The themes were not discussed in the order in which they occurred in

the study. Verbal/face-to-face reoccurred at least 15 times consistently by all participants.

Feedback reoccurred about 10 times in the study; perceptions reoccurred only 5 times;

and trust, care, respect, and worth reoccurred 7 times.

Figure 1

Qualitative Item Analysis Qualitative Chart and Frequency of Reoccurring Themes

0 2 4 6 8 1012141

Perception

Written

Trust-Care

Feedback

Verbal

My research questions guided this study and the interview questions afforded a

means to reach answers to the research questions. My story was narrated within the

stories of the participants. The interactive interviews helped me not only to look outward,

but also to look inward as I pondered on the participants’ stories. Finally, a discussion of

the data was rendered in an effort to find meaning and resolutions to this research study.

Each teacher participant was given a pseudonym Mary, Betty, Janet and Molly

and David to protect his or her identity. During the transcribing, I edited the passages to

avoid redundancy and circumvent comments that were irrelevant to the focus of this

study by using (…). Then I used brackets {} to insert words or phrases to avoid

ambiguities for the reader. Additionally, I omitted comments that made references to

actual persons, school systems, and geographical locations in Georgia. This was done in

an effort to insure the confidentiality of participants.

Research Subquestion #1

Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact

teacher performance in the school setting?

Verbal/Face-to Face

The interviews revealed similar responses among the five participants. The

participants agreed that verbal skills were significant in impacting teacher performance.

Each participant presented different examples of verbal skills or scenarios. Face-to face

communications and verbal skills were articulated during faculty meetings. There were

common concerns that participants shared concerning the interpersonal communication

skills of the principals in a face-to-face communication situation. The principals

articulated well in faculty meetings compared to face-to-face communication. In

interacting with participants, their lived experiences of both previous and current

principals were shared. Mary expressed thoughts concerning this.

My previous principal exercised very good verbal communication skills when it

came to articulating goals and expectations. He expressed himself well in faculty

meetings even though he was bad about making blanket statements to the whole

staff rather than dealing with the offender so to speak. I have seen some of this

{blanket statements} in my current principal as well. He {current principal} is

very difficult to deal with . . . .I don’t really deal with him that much since he just

blasted me for supposedly saying something I didn’t say. Someone told him I had

said something to a student. He did not ask me if I said it. He just caught me in

the hall and blasted me in the hall in front of students and other people. I just

basically avoid him if I can.

Betty expressed that her principal was a polite person, but sometimes his encounters were

more like an attack.

My principal communicating in the hall as anyone can see is always polite. Once

in a while, he and I are both sarcastic people. We go back and forth with sarcasm

even in front of the kids or walking by the kids with a newspaper and he will hit

me on the head with it. But in the office, when you come in his office, he may not

always look up at you. He’ll say yes and just tell him what you need and he’ll

give you more answers and say “Get out” sarcastically. You get a little tired of

the “get out of my office” part. If he is concerned with the things you are saying,

he starts rubbing his head. He never yells or screams. He is not a quiet talker. He

has a loud voice, but it’s not a yell. He is sarcastic in his office unless he’s mad at

me for something in which case it is automatically my fault, and then he walks up

to me. I don’t know what I’ve done until he says “So and so is in my office.” And

I say that’s a complete lie. Then he says, “No problem, I’ll take care of it.” So

being attacked right off the bat when I don’t even know what I’ve done and I

haven’t done anything is a little stressful. So I kind of learned that when he

comes up to me, no matter what he says, I didn’t do it. When he comes up to me

about what some kid told mom . . . .The first approach is an attack . . . He just

walks up like a bulldozer.

Janet described her principal’s face-to-face encounters as being verbally abusive and

demeaning. Her emotions revealed her pain as she remembered what had taken place. She

found the courage to speak.

Five years ago, I had a principal who was very monstrous. I mean that he had a

devious spirit and his motives were to intimidate and break your spirits in order to

demonstrate his authority. He did a lot of yelling when he called you into the

office. To me, that was not very professional. It was very demeaning. It is a very

poor way to motivate the staff to work for you. Sometimes words can be more

hurtful than if someone physically touched you. You can heal from the effect of

being physically touched better than negative words. I found out later that it was

not something that happened only to me, but it was the way he handled many of

his teachers. He was able to communicate in the faculty meetings. He

communicated face-to-face very poorly in turns of motivating and supporting me.

There were often times when he would take a parent or student account and start

yelling at the teacher. Many times people would do things out of fear of a tongue-

lashing. . . .It was verbal abuse. There was an instance when I was seeking a

transfer, but I was not able to get the transfer. When I did not receive that job at

the end of the year, I had to go back to my same school and to the same principal I

spoke about previously. He called me in to speak with me. He said I did not get a

transfer because nobody in the county wanted me. He said it in such a way that

was very callus, very cold, and very unprofessional. It really hurt me to have him

say that no one wanted my expertise or wanted me at their school. He was not

very sensitive or professional.

On the other hand, participant Molly shared her experience of working with a principal

that value her through good face-to-face communication skills. She also shared her

principal’s wisdom in dealing with issues concerning individuals.

The fellow {principal} that I enjoyed the most talked to me directly, adult to

adult: “This is what we need, this is not working.” We would hash out whatever

we had between the two of us. The principal would talk to me as a person and

respect me as an educated intelligent adult. When there was an issue with an

individual, he did not preach to the whole faculty. When he talked to me one on

one, he said, “This is where I see the problem.” Then he would give me a chance

to respond, and we would talk back and forth until we came to an understanding

as to how we were going to do things.

David described his principal as a good communicator who knows what to say and how

to say it when dealing with faculty.

He (principal) has a pleasant tone, even when he is chastising us. He has never

raised his voice at us. He’s a good communicator . . . When he first started at this

100

school, he seemed to have some times where he would trip over his words and go

back and restate his statement another way n faculty meetings. Sometimes, our

principal comes off as a bit cold and by the book, but that’s what we needed when

he first came on. . . . He has warmed up a bit and has even become more visible to

the students, but he still knows what needs to be done and what needs to be said to

get the job done and students improving.

Interlude #1

I listened attentively and interjected whenever necessary during the

interviews being careful not to lead their thoughts or words. My thoughts and

feelings concerning interpersonal communications skills of principals began to

surface in my memory. As I listened to each respondent during his or her time

interviewing, I began to relate to each story in a different way. I began to realize

that my experiences were not unique but a part of a culture in which I was a

member. I began to reflect on my first thoughts concerning this dissertation topic.

As a child, my parents taught me to speak those words that heal. If the

words you say do not heal, then do not speak them. Living a sheltered life has

somewhat blinded me to the fact that everyone does not speak words that heal.

Throughout college, my professors conversed with sensitivity and grace. In the

world of education, I expected my superiors to have that same grace about them.

In most of my professional career, my principals have demonstrated a weakness

in interpersonal communication skills, which includes face-to-face

communications as being most critical. As one of the participants expressed

feelings of hurt, I too join her in expressing feelings of hurt and pain and that of

101

grace and joy.

One thing that interfered with my joy of teaching was face-to-face

encounters with one of my previous principals. Face-to-face encounters with her

gave me feelings of inferiority complexes. She always made inappropriate

comments about my voice, my last name, and my morals when we were face-to-

face. She made me wonder all the time if there were something wrong with me. I

pondered whether my colleagues and students saw me in the same light. I too

have experienced verbal language that has offended and bruised me to the point

of anger and resentment.

I remember an incident when I was at fault. I unknowingly broke a

spelling contest rule at the last phase of the contest. I was really sorry and took

responsibility for my action. The principal used harsh language in the presence

of students and parents. Such language as “Are you crazy? Any first year

teacher knows better. When this is over, get in my office.” One does not use this

type of language in a professional environment. Language is so beautiful when

words are chosen with care. My response was to be as nice as possible and not to

stoop where I do not belong. The words and tone of voice of my principal

continue to sound long after the offense has passed. I have always wondered what

my principal had hoped to accomplish be using such a tone with me.

On the other hand, there were principals who brought joy into my

teaching. I remember one of my principals would go out of his way to say hello.

He made it a point to visit each classroom in the morning. His words were always

well chosen and full of wisdom. When communicating unpleasant news

102

concerning parental disappointment in me, he gave his personal approval of my

work.

Written Communications

Written communications found its way into the expressions of the participants. It

was consensus among participants that written communications, like verbal

communications, might set the tone for a good working relationship and instill motivation

to improve performance. The following passages extracted from the interviews

expressed the role of written communication in teacher performance in the school setting.

Mary expressed her thoughts on this issue.

I would rather spend 5 minutes reading an email than have to sit in a faculty

meeting for 30 minutes of announcements of stuff that people could have put in

an email and I could have read in 5 minutes. So I mean I’m perfectly fine with

him dealing with people through email. I prefer that because it seems like less of a

waste of time. He is very professional in that sense. I do not know if he does not

think before he hits the send button or go back and reads what he wrote. Because

he would write things to the whole faculty…and this is the same problem that

goes back to the first principal I worked with at my current school. He would

address the people who are not the problem, but just blast it out at the whole staff

instead of addressing the two or three who are the actual problem. The language

and the tone depend on the email. The last one of the big ones {email} he set

out…He blasted the whole staff for not following his instructions; which were not

very clear from the beginning. He admitted they were not very clear. But then

continued to talk about the things we did wrong without actually telling us what

103

he wanted from us.

Betty’s principal used email effectively and was described as a good communicator in the

area of written communication.

His {principal} emails are always to the point. There is no beating around the

bush. And, if he has something to say that he doesn’t want to be brought up ever,

he won’t send it in an email or he denies the whole thing. I think we all do that.

That is his communication style. He is a good communicator.

Some principals elect to use written communication, such as email, as a quick way to get

information to faculty. Janet explained that her principal never used written

communication because it would reveal his abusive behavior.

Many times the principal dealt with me in an insensitive manner. He

always felt the need to yell and slam books or even papers on desks. He

loves to intimidate and he knows he intimidates me. He knew I would not

challenge him. The way I felt inside was that I was inferior to him and my

colleagues. At some point, I thought I was truly in the wrong profession. He

very seldom used written communication, because it would be traceable.

Molly expressed how written communication from her principal did not allow her to

explain herself. She also expressed how written communication is open to interpretation

of the reader and should not be the sole means of communication.

The fellow {principal} that I enjoyed the most talked to me directly, adult to

adult, “This is what we need, this is not working.” We would hash out whatever

we had between the two of us. I have had principals who would send you a note!

To me a written communication is often open to interpretation as to what a person

104

means; that was their sole means of communication, “I’ll write you up, I’ll put

something in your box for you to respond to, because you didn't do this little thing

whatever it was.” You didn't get face-to-face encounters; you didn't get a chance

to explain yourself. It was predominantly written stuff. It makes you feel like “if

I'm so dumb, if I’m so slow that you have to write me notes about every little

thing, maybe I ought not to be in this classroom! Maybe I don't know how to do

this job.” When I first started teaching that was incredibly threatening to me

because I really did not know a whole lot about what I was doing. I was insecure

about it. Once I passed about 20 years . . . . I was confident enough in what I was

doing to go on and do my teaching. However, back early in my career, that could

have wrecked my whole week!

Molly gave a more specific incident that occurred to give better insight of the impact of

written communications from her principal.

A specific incident that took place with my class was on the playground during

their mandated recess. There were probably six classes on the playground at that

time. There were four teachers on one side of the playground and I was standing

with another teacher in a whole other area. The teacher and I were just chatting, in

fact about a student we shared in reading group. We were talking about how we

could connect to better help this child! My principal put a note in my box that she

had observed me talking to a teacher on the playground. She further wrote that I

was not to do that because safety was of utmost importance and I needed to have

my eyes on the children. When I got the note I was furious. Fortunately for me I

was confident enough in who I was and what I was doing that I knew where my

105

kids were. I knew what they were doing pretty much on the playground, but it

made me so mad! I felt like a kindergartner and I just had my hand spanked. I was

required to do a response. I responded, “I will attempt to de better.” It was a good

month before I totally absorbed it. It still makes me mad when I think about it.

Email use was very common among principals. David expressed similar thoughts to those

of participant Betty. Emails from the principal were quick, efficient and professional.

He’s a good communicator. He sends us emails regularly and keeps us abreast of

what is going on and what needs to be done. He is always to the point and the

tone of the email is very professional. He mostly communicates with us

{teachers} through email and faculty meetings held twice a month. He will also

answer your emails in an efficient manner.

Interlude #2

Written communication is a very important skill that all principals

demonstrate with ease. What one writes and what one says, should be

communicated with care and respect. I agree that written communication is left to

the interpretation of the reader and sometimes what was communicated was really

misunderstood. An example of this is seen in a note that my principal put in my

box as a written reprimand. When I checked my box, I was surprised to receive a

note from her, because she very seldom communicated through written

communication. As I read the note, I was dumbfounded to know that I was being

accused and reprimanded for screaming at a child. She punctuated some of the

sentences in all capitals, bold type, and multiple exclamation marks. For me, this

meant she was raising her voice through written communication. I tried to replay

106

the activities of the day and especially any reprimands given to this student. My

entire day was consumed by thoughts of this note. On that particular day, there

were parents in my class during the entire day. These are the actual words and

punctuation of the note:

Mrs._________, as I walked by your class today approximately 1:15, I observed that you

were SCREAMING at a child and in the child’s FACE!!!. This behavior is NOT

TOLERATED at THIS school. We have many visitors in the school today and let’s hope

that they have not witnessed YOUR behavior. Be in my office PROMPTLY after the last

bus to discuss YOUR BEHAVIOR!!!

The exclamation marks and the entire tone of this letter stunned me. I did reprimand the

child, and I kneeled down to get on the child’s level. I leaned over to grab crayons. This

action caused me to become closer to the child. She used the phrase in the child’s face.

In what context was I supposed to understand “in the child’s face”? In the culture of the

school, these were fighting words. She assumed from my lip moving and expression that

I was yelling even though she did not hear my voice to such intensity.

When written words have not been carefully chosen, the hurts and pains are felt the same

as abusive verbal language. In her note, she was concerned about the possibility of a

visitor witnessing my behavior, not knowing that there were parent visitors who

witnessed her peeking through the window. Teachers try to be on their best behavior in

the presence of parents. She later apologized for using non-professional language and

making a hasty judgment after finding out that indeed there were parent visitors. My

principal never attempted to come in the classroom to get a good understanding of the

situation. When principals interact appropriately with teachers, written reprimands can be

avoided. They might, instead, turn the written communication into helpful criticism,

praise, and encouragement which would in turn encourage better teacher performance.

107

When my principal approaches me through written communication, I need to feel that

sensitivity reigns in the tone of the communication. For me, this prepares me to receive

the communication.

Feedback

Most of the participants felt that feedback was significantly important in

improving their performance. Their stories differ, but only slightly. Mary shared an

extract from her interview session.

My previous principal never gave me any individual feedback as to what I was

doing was correct or not correct, so I just continued to do the things that I’d been

doing. I figure well if it is wrong, eventually someone will get around to telling

me . . . And then there was the week that contract renewals were supposed to be

given to the Board at that particular County. I was called in and told that I was

not being renewed. I was given this long list of things I had supposedly done

wrong. I was not given any sort of professional development, guidance or

anything in terms of improving myself.

My current principal never evaluates me other than passing through my class for 3

minutes at a time. He gave me no feedback. He never said a word to me. He sat

in my class for 3 minutes and did not say anything to me about what he observed.

He didn’t ask any questions. Nothing!

I didn’t think he can give me reliable feedback because I don’t think he knows a

lot about my curriculum. And I think to do a fair evaluation or observation, you

have to have some knowledge of the subject matter. I don’t think someone who

knows nothing about music can walk in a classroom and do a reliable observation.

108

I don’t think he can teach me how to communicate to my students, because he

doesn’t communicate with me. I don’t think he’s been in my classroom and has

seen me operate with my students to the extent where he can give a reliable

report. I believe that at least 50% of what he’ll say about me would be based on

what he has read on my yearly evaluation written by assistant principals or

department heads that did my evaluation.

Betty shared similar thoughts.

He knows I can make awesome results, but he has never seen me teach. He’s not

the one who does my evaluation. It has always been the assistant principal. This

is the first year where he is supposed to do my evaluation, but he’s never come

into my room to evaluate me. He’ll come in my room; he’ll stay about a minute,

and he’ll walk back out so everyone will be able to see his face once in a while.

Janet shared how her principal gave much of the responsibility of evaluation feedback to

the assistant principals. She also shared that the principal’s feedback was a time for

tongue-lashing. When the principal did say something good, this participant did not take

her principal’s words to heart.

I did not have a good relationship with the principal that I had 4 or 5 years ago. I

felt if I did something in contrary to what the principal wanted, I was going to get

another tongue-lashing. That type of feedback I did not want to experience again.

There was a time he would say “Good job.” I had been so beaten down by him

that I did not think he really meant it. I remember I was working myself up and

trying to get prepared for the next year. I was trying to go beyond what I was

supposed to do. He said, “The school year has ended, go home.” Maybe he was

109

saying I was doing my best or he did view what I was doing was worthy. The

principal I have now just tells her assistants to approach you instead of

approaching you directly. They may deal with you, but she will not voice her

disposition. Her assistants do her dirty work.

Molly preferred face-to-face feedback with her principal. This is the not the preferred

style chosen by the principal. Only in extreme cases will the principal utilize face-to-face

feedback. She expressed that feedback was needed to improve.

I would like to have face-to face feedback with my principal. My principal does

not utilize this type of communication unless something dynamic has taken place

between teacher and student. Evaluations are done and placed in teacher boxes for

signature. There is no other interaction for discussion of what has taken place.

Remember the recess incident? She (principal) put a written reprimand in my

box, requested a written response, and it is finished. She is the kind of principal

where everything is filed for a day of need. Feedback is always helpful in trying

to get you to become a better teacher.

David expressed encouraging thoughts. His principal’s feedback has proven to be

instrumental to him as a professional.

My principal is to the point in all communications. His feedback in any given

situation has proven to be helpful to me as a professional. There was a time he

prevented me from getting the AP US History position at the end of my second

year, giving it to a person who was just finishing his first year. He said I had “too

much on my plate” for an AP course and that I could take the course to learn how

to teach it; I was not getting the job. He has told me several times that he has

110

noticed my love and passion for history. I appreciated that. He knows I stumbled a

bit since I started there, and while he gave me NIs on my evaluations, he said

there was progress and that the NIs should be seen as things to improve.

Interlude #3

My personal children try very hard to please me even though they are adults.

They cherish the thoughts that I may have concerning their lives. They may disagree

many times with my perspective, but they want and need to know how I feel concerning

them. In the same way, teachers have a need and desire to know the thoughts that their

principals have concerning them. Feedback is a need not just a duty that principals

render. The manner in which feedback is given is even more important. I remember very

clearly how one of my principals said these very words. “If I was a student at this school,

I would die to be in your class.” I was on cloud nine the entire day. I felt so encouraged

that she appreciated the efforts that I gave to my teaching. She had confidence and

trusted my professional judgments concerning my students. This gave me the motivation

to read, research, and execute best practices in my classroom.

In my early days of teaching in Georgia, I experienced principals that were not

good at giving feedback. During the time of evaluations, my previous principal just

wanted me to sign the paper work. There was no time to ask questions. If any questions

were asked, it was an offense to her. Mostly, feedback came in the form of a reprimand

not so much as praise, or a collaborative effort to improve teacher performance or to

reach school goals. Feedback will not always be praise to the ear, but it should always

encourage the teacher in some way. Another one of my former principals used

demeaning terminology such as “get off your butt,” or “I will not give you a good

111

evaluation unless you agree to…” Sometimes he used vulgarity such as “ass, hell, and

shit.” He often used his favorite phrase: “All black people used these words, why do you

look at me as if you are not black?” I hated when he offended my personal being. This

type of feedback was never productive.

Sensitivity, Care, Support, Worth and Trust

During the sessions, several of the participants discussed such skills as showing a

sense of care for teachers as people and professionals. The discussion extended into

valuing teacher opinions, their expertise, and their work in the principal-teacher

relationship. They spoke adamantly as they shared emotions and honesty. Mary shared

her story.

If I wanted to try a particular thing and I needed certain resources or supplies, I

have no indication from my administration that I would get any kind of support

for it. I offered to teach advanced placement Chemistry during my planning

period this particular school year without being paid for extended days. The

request was not acknowledged much less accepted. I made the offer in writing

because I know there were students who wanted to take advance placement

chemistry and it had not been put on the schedule. I offered twice in writing to

the principal to teach the course without asking for extended day pay and he did

not acknowledge that I made the offer…. I would not trust him; I don’t trust him.

I’ve known administrators that were 15-year teachers, and then became

administrators. And we have one now, he’s doing very good for a first year

administrator. He remains very sympathetic. It seems like after people have been

an administrator for 3 or 4 years, they go from understanding what the teachers

112

are going through to not caring what the teachers are dealing with. I’ve seen it

happen with four different assistant principals over my time at my school. This is

my tenth or eleventh year. It is very common.

Betty shared expressions of praise concerning principals support and care of teachers at

her school.

My principal is a huge defender of my orchestra. And he has gone to the Board

and the superintendent and has told me how to get my parents to go to the Board

and Superintendent for orchestra needs. So in that, I absolutely love my principal.

We needed about $500 worth of new instruments. So I got everything I wanted

minus one instrument. It made me happy. I did not want to work anywhere else

because I heard so many bad stories about principals who don’t support their

orchestras or don’t support their Fine Arts Programs at all and mine would fight

for it and I loved it. I have one of the rare principals who actually cares what I do.

This is awesome. He comes to all of our concerts. He lets me take the kids out

once in a while to have rehearsal in the mornings before concerts to do a

fundraiser presentation. And you know a lot of people {principals} will not let

you take students out of instructional time. And he’s very good about assisting me

in writing my proposals for field trips: “This will not make it past the Board…fix

this and I think you will have no problems.” So he’s very good with that.

She also shared thoughts on her principal’s expressions of kindness and sensitivity

concerning her as a person and teacher.

I lost a lot of sleep living in an apt. My neighbor had a newborn baby. Every four

hours I awaken up with the parents for every feeding, every bad dream, and every

113

dirty diaper. It caused clinical insomnia. It lead to depression, and I actually had

to go and get medication for everything. I was having a really hard time.

Because of the lack of sleep, I could not get to work on time to save my life.

When he saw things were getting really bad, he caught me in the hall and said

come into my office and asked, “What is going on?” I told him I have got this

problem. I’m on medication and dealing with it, and I’m trying really hard to

make it on time. He was very sensitive about that: “What can I do? Why didn’t

you tell me? I could have been helping you. What can I do?” He’s also big on our

physical health. For Christmas, he got us two weeks membership to the Y. He’ll

randomly pull you into his office and asks “How’re you doing? What are you

doing to keep yourself healthy?” He’s very much into that. He was doing a lot of

research where teachers were having burn out and had a lot of health problems

that they were so caught up in the job that they forgot to take care of themselves.

It’s something we do all the time.

Janet expressed thoughts that somewhat differed.

A lot of times people would do things out of fear of a tongue lashing or fear of

losing their job because of the lack of full cooperation and support of

administration. I remember when we had a dessert concert. I wanted them to eat

their dessert while the performance was going on. It was sort of like a dinner

theater. And I remember that he criticized me and I was told that no one would be

moving around during the performance. No one would be setting up the table or

doing anything until after the performance. Things like that are very minute when

you look at the big scheme of things. Really, if the children are learning, if the

114

children are happy, if they are succeeding, and if they go from the beginning of

the year knowing more at the end of the year, that should have been more

valuable than small things like that {minute things}.

Molly shared how her principal valued her over job responsibilities. The principal

invested in the person not the job. She also shared her principal’s personal philosophy on

leadership.

The principal I remember the most is the principal I worked for 11 years. I always

felt like he supported everything I did. For instance, my child got sick at school

one day. The school called me at my school, and I hung up the phone and told

him that my son had passed out at school. He said “Then you need to leave now!”

and headed out toward the room and he said “Don’t go back to your room, you

need to go” and I said “but I’ve got to go get my purse, my car keys!” And he

said, “Oh, ok!” He was more concerned with me, my personal self, and my child,

than he was for my classroom! He had already called for a person to come and

cover my classroom until he could get a substitute there. It was a very rewarding

experience during those years. Because I always felt like he was behind me in

whatever I was doing. I loved working for him. Now there were a couple of

people who butted heads with him on different things, and he and I butted heads

on things, there was always a great deal of respect on his part for me on what I

was doing. His philosophy was, “My job is not to run the school; my job is to

make sure that teachers can do their job!” And he really lived up to that. If you

needed something for the classroom, then he did everything that he could to meet

that need. That doesn’t mean that you always got it, because in schools there is

115

never money for anything. But it wasn’t because he didn’t try; he tried to work

around, he’d arrange something, he would do everything that he could to make

sure that you had that need met. With him I felt like we were friends, and we were

partners in teaching these children. . . We were not friends on a personal level. I

never saw him outside of school, maybe occasionally. I did not have any kind of

relationship with him away from school. If he called me up now and say “I’m the

principal of a school and I need you to come teach for a year.” I would go teach

for him. I had that type of relationship with him. I felt valued. I felt that my

professional opinion was an important thing and he truly cared about me.

Interlude #4

Principals are people and they do lack skills in communication, but

teachers do also. The key word is skill. This study has caused me to look within

self, as well as others for answers. What skills do I lack as I try to prosper my

students academically? This question comes to mind as I make sense of this

study. My students may have trouble grasping certain skills because of what I

may lack. I, too, may lack some skills because of what my principal lacks. I have

worked under the supervision of great and not so great principals. Even under

the supervision of the great principals, it has taken me some time to feel self worth

as a professional.

There is one experience that I continue to remember over and over again

as I insert my feelings here. It is a major incident in my teaching profession that

has prompted me to share my story in this study. I am indeed a participant with a

story to share.

116

I was so excited as I began to fulfill my dream of getting my specialist

degree. I had a great relationship with my principal. She was so cooperative and

signed any paper work that my school required of her. The time came when I had

to shadow her. This simply means that I had to follow her around for a given

amount of time to observe the daily activities of a principal in the most natural

form. I was excited. The shadowing never took place. I was asked to come to

school at 7:00 A. M. and make sure that all the trash cans were placed on the

outside of the restroom doors. I never found out exactly what principals do during

their daily activities except for what I observed throughout the day. I trusted this

principal to mentor me and give me some guidance since I aspired to be an

administrator. She sat me down in her office and said that I was not “principal

material.” Therefore, there was not a strong effort to help me know the things that

I needed to know concerning school administration. I was never given leadership

responsibilities such as team leader, or director of the after school program. The

principal appointed an EIP teacher who was in her first year teaching as director

over the after school program. The first year teacher only had a bachelor’s

degree without classroom teaching experience. My principal signed all necessary

paperwork, but she would not allow me to learn what I needed to know through

observation and practice. I was devastated. When my professor asked us to

share in class, I made up things. She was characterized as a principal that only

helped those who measured up to her standards. I did not believe it at first until I

fell victim to her power as an administrator to make me or break me. Our

relationship began to go down hill. Many times, she would let me know that my

117

professional career was in her hands. She began to harass me through my

grandchild who attended the school. She disrespected me by not referring to me

as Mrs. Kambeya, but instead as “her” or “she” when speaking to others in my

presence. She threatened to put things in my professional folder. Our friendship

turned to a ship of horror overnight. Everyday it seemed like my mistakes were

being magnified. I was summoned to her office throughout the day. There were

private confrontations constantly. Several times she conveyed to me that teaching

might not be for me. “Take some time off and think about it,” she would say.

Close to the end of the year, she celebrated the accomplishments of all the teacher

graduates except mine. She never mentioned that I had received my Ed.S degree.

She tried to block anything that I tried to do to prosper even a transfer to another

school. It was so devastating that I had to get assistance from GAE. Finally, I

made a decision to transfer. When transfer efforts were blocked, I knew I had to

resign. She refused to give any professional references, which I thought was

better than giving a bad reference.

I lost all trust in her as a friend and especially as an leader. I found it

hard to confide in others because I did not trust anyone any more. I received

counseling from my husband and my pastor. It was like the death of a dear friend.

I came to realize in the healing process that she was never a friend and never

actually cared for me as a professional. Her actions conveyed to me that I was no

more valuable than the desks in my classroom. I was an invisible entity at this

school. I was at my lowest point and feelings of inadequacy followed me from

school to school. It was difficult bringing myself out of this depression.

118

Research Subquestion #2

How does the teacher’s perception of their principal affect teacher performance?

Teacher Perception and Effects

Interactions, or the lack of principal interactions, with the teachers left lasting

effects. Mary again shared her thoughts on this matter.

A lot of the principals, once they became an administrator, forget what is

supposed to happen in a classroom. They forget how to do things in a classroom.

They forget how to think on their feet when they have to deal with issues that

arise in a classroom. I really think that a lot of administrators lose their minds

when they become administrators.

She shared how her principal viewed her as a professional.

I think my principal might think I am just an irritating person. When he sees me,

he tends to find someone else to talk to or he tends to turn away. I really don’t

know how he feels about me. I’m not going to ask. I probably don’t want to

know the truth. I’m not at the school to be liked. And I really don’t care if he

likes me as long as he respects the job that I’m doing. But I’m really not sure if

he does. I have virtually no interaction with him whatsoever. He does not speak

to me and many times I pass him in the hall and say hello Dr.____ and he’s not

even looked at me. Does he view me as an excellent teacher? With this type of

interaction and behavior it is obvious that I’m not valued as a good teacher.

She also discussed the affect this had on her performance as a teacher.

I don’t do my best teaching, and my attitude towards self, students, and the

school has become so negative. I really did not even try to find another position.

119

Every school system is going to have its own set of problems and with the amount

of time I have put in, I’m finally teaching a subject that I enjoy.

Betty revealed quite a different perspective.

He thinks I’m awesome. He knows I do a good job. He knows that I fight really

hard. I whipped the kids around 180 degrees on their first concert. I got a

standing ovation. No one knew his or her kids could actually play. He knows I

can make awesome results, even though he has never seen me teach. He is down

to earth guy and this has been a big motivational force for me. Overall his

dealings with me have been very good. If my principal doesn’t trust me to get the

job done then I must ask myself, “Why am I here at your school?” By trusting

me, this gives me confidence and motivation to do even more.

Janet could barely speak without shedding tears. She spoke about how her principal’s

facial expressions toward her were synonymous with hate. She recounted the following

experience.

If hate could be defined in a facial expression, my previous principal of 5 years

expressed that to me constantly. I knew he did not value me first as a person let

alone as professional. He looked down on me as if I did not belong in this

profession. I began to question myself as to where I really belonged.

She gave an example to substantiate her feelings.

There was another instance I was ready to start a new year. I always look at a new

year as a new start. I was very positive at that time and willing to do the very best

that I could do at my job even before he approached me. It was not my mindset to

be negative or not to be a team player. Just because someone is seeking a transfer

120

doesn’t mean they are not putting forth an effort to do their best. I was seeking a

transfer because there was nothing I could do right to please this particular

principal. I was seeking a transfer to get away from the verbal abuse. A lot of

things he was doing were negative and I felt that another position would be better

for me. I could not function in the classroom with feelings of low esteem, no

confidence, a principal that I thought hated me and made me feel that everybody

else did too. I could not give to my students what they needed because I thought I

was not qualified to do so. A lot of things he was doing were negative and I felt

that another position would be better for me.

She discussed how this affected her.

This perception affected me in two different ways. It really can depress you and

make you feel like you’re just marking time. What you are doing is not just good

enough. It has taken me a lot of years to realize that it’s really not about what that

individual thinks but overall you have to be satisfied with yourself. If you have

done the very best that you can do with the children that you teach, then the

satisfaction you feel no one can take from you. It was very difficult for me to be

comfortable in my classroom. There were times he supported me to make himself

feel good. I did not trust him and I have not been able to really trust any

administrator. My current administrator is quite different in the way she

reprimands. Because she doesn’t always do it directly from self; she sends others.

To me that seems a little sneaky.

Molly offered similar expressions. She adds to the discussion the difficulty in following

administrators who have caused you to have a poor perception of them.

121

I always felt like my principal thought I was doing a fairly good job. I had one

that did not value me as a teacher. His thoughts were, “ as long as you stay out of

my way, you are fine.” I didn’t feel valued as a teacher and yet the other fellow

{principal} I worked for valued me as a teacher. It made a difference for me.

This principal was a team player and saw himself a team member not so much as

the boss. We (faculty) gave him that respect automatically. His sense of

collegiality motivated the entire staff and raised the respect we had for him. My

perception of him was positive and encouraging. It is difficult to trust, confide in,

and be led by a principal who has given you a terrible perception of himself and

of you as a teacher. This may be the big reason why many teachers who are

considered weak teachers leave a school and blossom elsewhere. Principals

should be able to see inside of teaches what they do not see in themselves and find

a way to bring it out. This will enable them {teachers} to go beyond what they

know to do and make a difference in the life of a child. The principal I worked

for did just that for me and I worked my all for him.

David expressed similar thoughts. He describes his principals as being firm yet sensitive

to the difficult work of teachers.

My principal has expressed to me many times the good job that I am doing. I

perceive him to be a sensitive person and a caring even though he pulls no

punches. He knows that it is a struggle to teach and teach and students still fail.

He offers encouragement and wisdom because has traveled this same road. I

appreciate that. It encourages me when I'm trying to do my job and the students

are still failing. I know it is not me; it is them {the students}. Of course, he pushes

122

student achievement and improvement, and while we as teachers here try, it is an

uphill climb.

Interlude #5

It is a natural feeling to feel good about yourself when you know that your

superior sees you in a positive light even though there are flaws. Flaws exist in everyone.

I still remember the statement that one of my principals made to me, “If I were a student

in this school, I would die to be in your class.” This will forever ring in my ears. I also

remember how I felt inside. It was a feeling that soothed all the confusion that a school

day brings. It made me forget about the mistakes I had made that day and it made me

think how I was going to be better on tomorrow. This principal was the greatest principal

in the world. But I could see in her eyes and facial expressions that she really meant

what she said. My morale was boosted. Knowing that she saw something good in me

and voiced it motivated me to give more than what she expected of me. That same day, I

extended my lesson plans and called parents of students that I had been putting off for so

long. I found time, because I felt good about myself and what I was doing. On the other

hand, my former principal that I have spoken so adamantly about did not see me in a

positive light. This made me focus inward and I began to see all of my shortcomings. She

made me see all of my flaws and suggested that I might be in the wrong profession.

When I started to believe that, my love for teaching and my students went out the door.

My duties became mediocre and my students became just a room full of bad kids. I felt

bad that I would even feel that way. When things are not working well in the principal-

teacher relationship, the students are directed affected.

123

Emotional and Mental Effects

The respondents shared thoughts of avoidance, giving only the minimum

requirements, seeking other employment, and remaining in isolation as results of not

trusting administration and others. This is what Mary recounted.

I basically try to avoid my principal and try to continue to teach my students.

I would be motivated to do more or extend myself further. It would make it a

more pleasant place to work . . . I feel like if I am not appreciated, then I am not

going to work myself to death, not literally . . .. I have no motivation factor from

the administration to make me want to push hard . . .To some degree, I don’t give

a hundred percent to my classes. I feel more comfortable having as little

interaction with him as possible. I feel like I am able to be less anxious, less

knotty stomach if I am just not around him. I have been taking anxiety medicine

for about three years now. This helps me get through my teaching.

Janet gave an emotional account of the affect of her principal’s interpersonal

communication skills on her performance as a music teacher. She recounts how she

feared him more than making the mistake.

The communication skills especially the verbal skills of my previous principal

have affected me in a very negative way. By this I would second-guess everything

that I did in regards to the way that I teach and the decisions I made regarding my

program. It made me more indecisive and anxious about decisions. I had fear of

him {principal} not of making a mistake. Therefore, I could not grow from my

mistakes. Usually when he gives me a verbal lashing, it is no way I could not

finish the rest of the day because I would just be torn up. Usually I would go

124

home or take a little time away and get myself back together. These episodes stole

time from my students. I could not function properly in the presence of my

students. I became detached from them and those around me. He was so abusive

and so derogatory—slamming books on the table, making accusations, yelling,

and all of these different things. It was as if he was trying to break me down. He

would say things like—“Nobody wants you anyway.” I almost believed him.

Looking back on all of that: what doesn’t kill you make you strong. Even though

I don’t like verbal abuse, it made me a whole lot stronger of a person because I

did have to go through that. I had to learn from the things that he did that was

wrong. It made me look at my job in a different way. When I first started

teaching I was having fun. Everyday I went to work; it was fun for me. The kids

were learning. Now it is not like when I first started. The verbal abuse causes

other to talk. It has grown me up. I wouldn’t want to see anyone come through

the abuse. I considered quitting. I finally said that I was not going to let

something so detrimental make me quit something I love to do.

Janet shared words of wisdom.

A teacher ought to have a sense of comfort (not too much) and a level of trust

above them. Administrators can use their power for good to uplift teachers. They

need to find ways to help those who are deficient. There must be a more positive

approach. His knowing that a principal is more of a facilitator than a dictator

would have improved my performance. It makes you feel like you are a team and

like the principal is with you and not against you. Putting the fear of God in one

does not improve performance. I can respect a principal who is equitable and fair.

125

It is better than someone who is verbal abusive.

Molly expressed thoughts of avoidance and defending what is right. She also discussed

the importance of administrators having a working philosophy as an instructional leader.

I worked hard to be a better teacher because my principal expected me to. The

interpersonal communication skills that hinder my performance are disrespect and

written notes rather than face-to-face communication. The principal does not

have time for me, if I come and say “I need to talk to you about something.” I

understand their jobs are intensely diverse. A principal should be able to make

him or herself available in a reasonable amount of time. It holds you back. You

are sitting on hold until the issue is dealt with. Having a philosophy to build and

value me as a teacher motivated me to give my all. Give time to teachers when it

is needed and a positive respect and a valuing of them. Without teachers

principals will not have a job. They need teachers to supervise. Even if there is a

teacher who is not doing so good of a job, she has something going or she would

not be in the classroom to start with. Positive respect carries a long way and a ton

of weight. Give lots of encouragement. Most principals say, “I’m the principal

and I run this show.” That is not true, because the secretaries run the show.

Principals are here to help us as teachers do our jobs. Anything else is a

hindrance. How a principal interacts with a teacher gives that teacher the

motivation to perform in that classroom. Despite of all the challenges that a

classroom may bring, the principal really influences the teacher’s attitude toward

self, students, and the school itself. The teacher knows that he or she is not alone

on the playing field, and those who are the on field have each other’s backs.

126

Interlude #6

As I remember good times and bad times as a teacher, the profession is very

rewarding. I have no regrets here. I am responsible for the education of my students no

matter what problems I may be having with my principals. I offer no excuses for my

behavior, but I must look at what I let myself become because of maltreatment from my

former principal. Through all the turmoil, I did teach. It was not with the joy and

enthusiasm that I had experienced. If a child did not understand the first time, he or she

had to get it the best way they could after that. I did not put forth a strong effort to teach.

I became cold and bitter to anything positive concerning this particular school. In my

heart, I did not care if the school met AYP (Annual Yearly Progress). I did not meet on

weekends to tutor students in an effort help them pass the Criterion Reference

Competency Test (CRCT). I would not work more than my contract hours stated. I began

to miss days out of school. After all, I was invisible to the principal. If she did not think I

could do the job, then I was not up to doing the job. I am so glad that there were

colleagues who had experienced this same episode. They came to me and told me to

rethink what I was doing. It really did not matter what a principal said or did, I needed

to realize who I am and what I am capable of doing in the lives of children. My

confidence is not found in what a person says but it is found within me. I became so

ashamed of my attitude toward my students and my school. The joy of teaching was

missed so much. I did not experience all the enthusiasm for teaching that year, but it did

return later on as time passed. Regretfully, my students did not get my best teaching that

entire year. There were four students who did not pass the CRCT. They were capable

with proper coaching. I let them down. It was the first year that all of my students did not

127

pass the CRCT. I have matured in the teaching profession. I realized now that it is not

about me but all about the students. I have found the confidence to retire in this

profession. My principal should have conducted herself in a more responsible manner by

employing appropriate interpersonal communication skills. I too must respond using

good interpersonal communications skills. Instead of retaliating, I must respond in a way

that improves the principal-teacher relationship. There is an old saying, “It takes two.”

Sometimes it may need to take whoever is willing to give and not take. Teachers can

respond responsibly to maltreatment of principals. Principals must accept their

responsibility toward the trust, respect, and care of teachers. If a principal develops the

teaching skills of a teacher, he or she has enhanced the learning of students. If a teacher

finds trust, confidence, and honesty in his or her principal, the principal has found a

committed teacher.

Summary

The method employed in this research project examined teachers’ perception of their

principals’ interpersonal communication skills. Not only were the perceptions of others

shared but I also shared my personal experiences allowing self to become an active

participant in this research project. The participants were not identified by demographic

information. There were four females and one male. They all had advanced degrees with

a minimum of three years experience.

Qualitative data for this research were collected through interactive interviews. An

experienced panel of teachers from the Georgia Southern University Doctorate program

in Educational Administration devised the interview questions. The group was considered

experienced because of knowledge and years of practice in the field of education. After

128

approval for Georgia Southern University IRB, random sampling was used in selecting

participants for this research. There were 35 schools: 13 elementary schools, 11 middle

schools, and 11 high schools. Interviews were conducted, audio-recorded, and

transcribed by using IBM Via Voice. Participants were allowed to review all

transcriptions for accuracy. To maintain the confidentiality of participants, no interviews

were conducted on school campuses. Names in this research study were not revealed.

Recurring themes and patterns, along with responses to the interview questions, were

categorized. The significant findings were presented in text selections from the

participants, and I voiced my experiences through interludes. The following gives a

description of the findings:

The participants consistently identified face-to-face communication as the most valuable

interpersonal communication skill among principals.

Principals easily articulated goals and missions of the school, and face-to-face

interactions were most difficult for principals.

Communication styles of writing and speaking, as well as verbal communication affect

teacher performance as well as verbal communication.

The use of blanket statements is an ineffective interpersonal communication skill. Written

communication is left up to the interpretation of the reader and can set the tone for

positive or negative interactions.

Attitudes, ideas, and behaviors of the principals do affect the performance of teachers.

When principals yelled, screamed, slammed books, and used abusive language, teachers

did not do their best teaching.

129

Principals who use a collaborative style of leadership experienced teachers who respected

and honored them as instructional leaders.

When principals valued their teachers through positive interaction, teachers were willing

to give more than 100% effort.

Teachers felt that principals did not value them when firsthand feedback did not take

place.

Poor interpersonal communication skills of principals caused depression, emotional

stress, indecisiveness, feelings of incompetence, compounded thoughts of suicide, search

for a new school, and little effort in work.

Good or poor interpersonal communications skills do affect teacher performance.

The teachers trusted their principals when the principals trusted them to make good

decisions, supported their decisions, and cared about their families and personal beings.

The teachers behaved toward the principal based on their perception of the principal. If

they thought the principal valued them, it reflected in their efforts. If they thought

otherwise, their attitudes and work efforts declined.

In Chapter 5, a discussion of the significance and implications of the findings as well as

recommendations for further research were presented.

130

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS

The purpose of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills as they relate to teacher performance. The

qualitative method of research was autoethnography. These research techniques allowed

me to become an active participant. I was an active participant in the sense that I shared

my personal experiences. During the interview sessions, I was careful not to influence the

responses of the participants. Data from interview questions were analyzed and important

themes and patterns wererevealed concerning teachers’ perception of principals’

interpersonal communication skills. A discussion of the findings was presented in

Chapter 5.

Summary

Communication skills, especially in the area of interpersonal communication are a

necessity for principals and for anyone who aspires to be a principal. Principals have the

responsibility of supervising teachers, which involves good interpersonal communication

skills. How the principal applies these skills may very well determine a teacher’s

performance.

Much emphasis has been placed on raising test scores through teacher

professional development, but little attention has been placed on the principal’s

interpersonal communication skills as having a direct impact on a teacher’s performance.

In order to give attention to this concern, a qualitative including autoethnography

research design was conducted to address this concern. It is important to understand the

role that these skills play since teacher performance is directly related to student

131

achievement and success. The overarching question of this study is this: what role do

interpersonal communication skills of the principal play in teacher performance? In

addition, the following subquestions guided the research:

1. Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact

teacher performance in the school setting?

2. How does the teacher’s perception of their principal affect teacher performance?

Teachers from northeast Georgia were randomly chosen as participants after the

researcher received IRB approval. Altogether, there were 13 elementary schools, 10

middle schools, and 10 high schools. Only five schools were included in this study: two

high schools, two middle schools, and one elementary school. Using an interactive

interview technique, five teacher participants were asked questions in an effort to elicit

teachers’ perceptions of principals’ interpersonal communication skills as they relate to

teacher performance.

The following steps were used to analyze the data:

• The researcher organized data by using index cards, file folders. The

index cards were used for notetaking during interviews.

• The researcher documented reoccurring themes that she thought were

major ideas of interests by participants. These were filed into small file

folders with a theme written on them. This allowed the data to be broken

down into smaller manageable units.

• The researcher continued to revisit audiotapes, notes, words and stories of

the participants.

• Other themes were added as some were deleted from the small files.

132

• The researcher’s own knowledge and perceptions allowed her to identify

the ideas in the data.

• The researcher kept records of revelations. A recording strategy of

keeping memos was employed.

• The researcher spoke into a digital recorder to guard thoughts and

interpretations of the data.

• The recordings were revisited many times in order to gain understanding

of the data. As the recordings, stories, and small file folders were revisited,

it was then that themes were clearly revealed.

• The themes from the data were: verbal/face-to-face, written

communication, feedback, trust, support, care, respect, and worth.

• After all information had been written on index cards and transferred to

small file folders.

Discussion of Research Findings

The purpose of this study was to examine Georgia teachers’ perceptions of

principals’ interpersonal communication skills and to understand the role these skills

played in teacher performance. The qualitative data gave much insight into teachers’

perception of principals’ interpersonal communication skills. In addition, the data

provided valuable information regarding impact of good and bad interpersonal

communication skills of principals; benefits of good interpersonal communication skills

of principals; and identified which interpersonal communication skills of principals were

most effective in boosting teacher performance.

133

I began reading through the data as an effort to unfold the findings and make

sense of them. It seemed at first that the findings were so basic, and consistent with the

literature. There had to be more. I began to ponder deeper into what I had learned about the

participants, about myself, and about shared experiences. First, it was our own personal

account of what we experienced. Secondly, we ventured into a past that reminded us of

feelings of pain and joy by being transparent through this research study. Finally, we

reflected within and found strength to be a beacon in our world of education. For it is

through our own experiences, good or bad that we have been empowered to be greater than

good.

Research Subquestion #1

Which interpersonal communication skills of principals do teachers believe impact teacher

performance in the school setting?

The interaction through face-to-face communication presented itself to be the number

one expression of effective or ineffective communication in a variety of scenarios. In several

scenarios, principals used abusive language, yelling, screaming, slamming of books, put-

downs, and avoiding teachers. Keashly (1998) refers to this treatment as emotional abuse.

Keashly further states that this kind of principal behavior produces a decrease in work effort

and an increase in absenteeism not to mention any commitment on the part of the teacher.

These were key findings in this study.

Another scenario revealed that one principal had a playful sarcastic nature, very practical

verbal skills, and interacted with a positive approach when interacting with the teacher.

Written communication was considered to have the same effect as verbal face-to-face

134

communication. There were other times when the principal did not give feedback concerning

teacher evaluation and performance or did not offer help.

According to data findings, principals articulated well the missions and goals of their

school. The teachers saw this interpersonal communication skill of their principals as

strength. There was a consensus among the participants that the major interpersonal

communication skill of the principal that impacted teacher performance was verbal

communication between principal and teacher. First, principals used blanket statements in

faculty meetings to deal with a person or an issue. Consensus was that this was a waste of

teacher time and somewhat offensive. They would rather that the principal use his or her

interpersonal communications skills by going directly to the offender to resolve any

problems. An interesting finding was that teachers felt that their principals were good

communicators when they did not yell, scream, or slam things. On the contrary, those who

did the latter were considered poor communicators and were described as abusive. One

teacher described her principal as monstrous with abusive language. She considered him

monstrous, because she feared him and did not want to experience the lashing of his tongue.

This was described as a norm for her principal. In other words, her principal used fear to

motivate teacher performance.

An even more interesting finding was that good principal verbal skills were identified as

the use of words that are well chosen and an opportunity for the teacher to respond. Findings

showed that principals knew what was needed to get the job done, but needed to use good

verbal skills as a strategy to get the job done. As one teacher said about her principal: “His

job is to make sure I can do my job.”

135

Additionally, the data revealed that the hallway was the most inappropriate place where

face-to-face communication took place. It was not stated as to why this was the most

common place. Teachers were concerned that this was another interpersonal communication

weakness that principals demonstrated when dealing with delicate issues. The principals did

not take in to account who was watching or listening when a teacher concern arose. This

offered students and others an open door to matters that did not concern them. Inappropriate

places to interact often brought about embarrassment and shame for the teacher and a poor

reflection on the principal. One teacher expressed that her principal “blasted her out” in the

hallway on more than one occasion. She described it as an attack and compared her principal

to a “bulldozer.” On the other hand, she expressed that her principal was sarcastic in a

playful manner in the hallway and that was great. The hallway was appropriate in some

scenarios and inappropriate in others.

Another interpersonal communication skill of the principals identified by participants that

impacted teacher performance in the school setting was that of written communication. They

all agreed that in written communication, many administrators’ messages were direct and left

question as to their meanings. Some messages could have been misinterpreted. The incident

of the recess and playground and the incident of the student misbehaving in the classroom

were prime examples from the data. These two incidents brought me back to the literature

concerning communicator’s style. Communicator’s style considers of what, and how, things

are said or written for that matter (Coeling & Cukr, 2000). Some types of communicating

styles are dominant, contentious, and attentive. Dominant communication is characterized by

speaking strongly in a take-charge manner. Contentious is communication that is

argumentative and quick to challenge. Attentive is very careful and empathetic

136

communication. In these incidents, the teachers felt a need to challenge the principal, because

the tone of the written reprimand was considered contentious.

Data reveal that written communication was just as important as verbal communication,

which warrants careful choices of words and tone. Written communication brought with it

reprimands and encouragement. Email was a common way that principals communicate with

teachers. It was also a time saver and to the point. Nevertheless, some principals still used it

as a means to make blanket statements. The teachers noted the style of written

communication and used it to determine the tone and heart of the principal. One teacher

stated that written communication by her principal was not practiced, because it would be a

way to trace his insensitivity and abusive language.

Moreover, feedback from principals was another concern that teachers expressed as

having an impact on their performance. I found this to be an interesting finding, because

most of the participants were not actually evaluated by their principals. This may have been

the norm in middle and high schools. Teachers wanted very much to be evaluated by their

principals. Data revealed that principals spent very little time if any in the classrooms, and

they had to rely on the testimony of the assistant principals in making yearly evaluations.

This practice of not evaluating teachers is contrary to the literature concerning effective

principals. Edmonds (1979a; 1979b; 1981) stresses that the effective leadership of the

principal is characterized by substantial attention to the quality of instruction. As an

instructional leader, the principal must position himself or herself to improve the

performance of teachers. When feedback was given, one teacher said it was not reliable

because it was not firsthand evaluation. This means that the principal gave feedback on the

testimony of the assistant principals. The teachers did not value the words of the principal

137

since he did not evaluate them. When the principal did not come in himself/herself to make

an evaluation, teachers believe that the principal did not value or respect them.

Finally, support, care and trust of teachers were expressed as an interpersonal

communication skill that impacted teacher performance. One teacher shared how her

principal was concerned about her personal being and family. Her principal recognized that

teachers must be cared for like any other asset. The care and support of the teacher was the

survival of the school. Still, another teacher said her principal would make it a point to

inquire about the health of his teachers. He had read something about burnout in an

education magazine, and he was concerned about his teachers’ burnout. If the teachers were

experiencing burnout and poor health, it would mean the death of the school. He gave each

teacher a membership to the gym. Support and trust were to be considered as well. Teachers

wanted to be trusted and supported in making decisions about their classrooms. They wanted

to be trusted as someone who could make decisions about teaching and learning.

Research Subquestion #2

How do the teachers’ perceptions of their principals affect teacher performance?

According to the literature, perception plays a vital role in interpersonal relationships.

The data are consistent with this concept. Principals influence behaviors, attitudes and ideas

of those who work under their supervision. Principals must earn such credibility as being a

trustworthy person, a strong leader, an expert in the field, and respect of subordinates

(Gaziel, 2003).

The teachers’ perception of their principals affected their performance in a variety of

ways. Data findings showed that those who saw their principals as good communicators,

respectful, polite, hard working, very cordial, and sources of support had a positive

138

perception of their principal. They gave more than 100% in work efforts. One participant saw

her principal as a source of wisdom and encouragement and gave this as a reason to work

harder even though the students were making low grades. This participant felt confidence in

himself as a professional, because his principal thought well of him also. Another participant

said she would go beyond duty for her principal, because she had seen in him a caring heart

when he was concerned about her family. This is consistent with the literature in that

perception is derived from early experiences or observation. Positive experiences promote

incentives for teachers to improve their performance.

Another interesting finding from the data was that those teachers who perceived their

principals as being insensitive, non-supportive, exhibiting poor interpersonal communication

skills, and possessing an overall negative perception of their principals were experiencing

low self-esteem, job dissatisfaction, and avoided contact with the principal.

The most interesting findings from the data were not so much how they perceived their

principals that affected their performance but, instead, how their principals perceived them as

teachers. For example, one participant explained that she knew that her principal saw her as

an irritant. When he saw her in the hallway, he would avoid talking to her but would talk to

other teachers. The principal’s avoidance of her influenced the attitude and behavior of the

teacher. She stated that she did not do her best teaching. They did not have a good working

relationship. She resolved that since her principal did not take the time to assess her work,

then she was not valued. Here the principal delivered a message of fear not of comfort.

Depression, difficulty to function in the classroom, mediocre teaching, and change of

attitude toward school goals were all associated with teachers who had poor perceptions of

their principals. Teachers’ perceptions of their principals affected teacher performance. The

139

literature revealed that teachers will almost certainly behave towards the principal in the way

they perceive the principal (Pashiardis, 2001).

Segrin and Flora (2000) stated in chapter two page thirty-four that self-problems such as

depression and low self-esteem are the results of interpersonal problems and interpersonal

communication.

The profound effect of fear on a teacher’s performance has lasting effects. Halawah

(2005) argues that subordinates do not fear the effective principal; they respect and trust their

principals. One participant reported that the principal’s strategy was to put the fear of God in

the teachers. Her fear of the principal was greater than the fear of making a mistake. She

reported that she could not do her job, because she was too emotional. There were times

when she left school early, because she was too torn inside. This she says stole time from her

students. She would have episodes of emotional crying. The tongue-lashing gave her a poor

perception of her principal and his “putdowns” caused her to look at herself in a negative

way. She became indecisive and anxious concerning her program. She detached herself from

students and colleagues as a result of this abusive treatment. She reported that she used this

situation as a learning experience and this abusive treatment made her strong in the end. She

also reported that she began to look at her job in a different way.

The data showed that teachers’ efforts were influenced by their principals’ interpersonal

communication skills. One participant reported that she was not motivated to extend herself.

In other words, she was just going to do the minimum requirement of her job. She resolved

that since there was not an appreciation of her as a professional, she would not work herself

to death. She said, “I would not give 100% to my class.” She also reported that medication

got her through classes.

140

Another finding that the data revealed was that teachers performed better when their

principals’ interpersonal communication skills were good. One teacher reported that because

of her principal’s high expectation, she became a better teacher. Whenever the principal had

time for her, he valued and respected her as a teacher. She also reported that her principal did

not have a “boss mentality.” He was a team player and a colleague. In her reflection, this

participant stated that principals do influence a teacher’s attitude toward self, the school, and

the student.

Overarching Research Question

What role do interpersonal communication skills of the principal play in teacher

performance?

From the analysis of the qualitative data, I found that the principals’ interpersonal

communication skills played a pivotal role in the teachers’ performance. It was very evident

that teaches wanted very much to have a good working relationship with their principals and

they wanted to do their best teaching for their students. That relationship depended much on

how the principal demonstrated his or her interpersonal communication skills.

The participants identified verbal/face-to-face, written communication, feedback,

sensitivity, care, support, and trust as interpersonal communications skills of their principals

that they believed had an impact on their performance. It was not a surprise to me that face-

to-face communication was the most common way that the principals interacted with their

teachers. This was consistent with the literature in that 80% of a principal’s time is engaged

in interpersonal communications such as face-to-face (Hall, 2002).

The participants spoke emotionally concerning verbal abuse, poor discretion in where to

reprimand, no feedback, and avoidance to interact. This created a poor climate that was not

141

conducive for teaching. Halawah (2005) maintains that a positive climate involves good

interpersonal communication skills. This contributed to teachers not being motivated to do

more in the classroom. Once the teacher’s attitude toward the principal was tainted,

classroom performance suffered. All participants wanted to be valued and respected by their

principals. These teachers who experienced a poor working relationships with their principals

sought other school systems for employment. They found it very difficult to function in the

classroom after having bouts of confrontation with their principals. Data also revealed that a

teacher felt a sense of guilt after learning that a couple of her students failed the CRCT

because she did not give more of herself.

Whatever the perception that the participants had concerning their principals, good or

poor, it affected their performance. If teachers perceived that the principal was supportive,

caring, genuine, trusting, attentive, and respectful, this motivated the teacher to excel in the

classroom. They also experienced increased self-esteem. The teachers were able to be

creative and to do their best teaching. On the other hand, if teachers perceived that principals

were non-supportive, verbally abusive, contrary, disrespectful, and not trustworthy, the

teachers were not supportive of school goals, gave little effort in the classroom, and sought to

leave their school. There were feelings of incompetence; therefore, performance in the

classroom was not at its best.

Analysis of Research Findings

The findings showed that principals’ interpersonal communication skills did have an

impact on teacher performance. From the interviews, all of the participants were consistent in

identifying interpersonal communications skills of their principal that impacted teacher

performance. They identified face-to-face communication, written and verbal, support and

142

caring, and trust and support. Listening attentively and avoidance were also mentioned. The

findings were very clear to point that the impact on teacher performance depended much on

how principals demonstrated their interpersonal communication skills as instructional

leaders.

One may think that the places where interpersonal communications skills take place are

of little importance. It appeared that most of the participants identified the hallway as being

the most common place to interact without regards to positive or negative interaction. Most

teachers did not like the hallway as a place for reprimand.

The teachers identified common practices of how principals interacted with their

teachers. Face-to face communication was the most common factor. Teachers wanted that

type of interaction. Written communicating saved time, but it was not the preferred.

Teachers all agreed there was a genuine need to interact with their principals face-to-face at

some point in the principal-teacher dyad.

The data showed both sides of the coin concerning teaching performance: principals who

demonstrated good interpersonal communication skills and principals who demonstrated

poor interpersonal communication skills. Those principals who were perceived as good

communicators using the interpersonal communication skills identified by the teacher

participants, experienced teachers at their best. On the contrary, principals who were

perceived as poor communicators experienced teachers at their worse.

In conclusion, attitudes and productivity of teachers were certainly affected by the

principals’ interpersonal communication skills. Based on how those skills were

communicated by the principals, the teachers’ responses were manifested in their

performance as professionals. Teachers expressed feelings of grandeur, giving 100% of

143

themselves, experienced high self-esteem, and felt apart of the team when their principals

respected them and valued them. They all agreed that they did their best teaching. When

principals did not demonstrate good interpersonal communication skills, teachers expressed

feelings of poor self-esteem, victims of verbal abuse, and feelings of incompetency.

In review of the literature, the leader who demonstrated a collaborative leadership style

(Slater, 2005) was more of a facilitator who trusted the teachers to make good decisions and

their decisions were supported. Teachers expressed this as a concern when the principal did

not trust their expertise. In the study, the teachers needed the support and approval of the

principal. Principals are described as finding it difficult to relinquish control when building a

collaborative climate in the school Blasé & Blasé, 2001). The transformational leadership

style can be attributed to those principals in the study who motivated, valued, empowered,

trusted, and respected their teachers (Burns, 1978). They found that their teachers were

exceeding contract efforts to make a difference in reaching the goals and mission of the

school.

Foster’s (2004) research findings are consistent with findings in this study that leadership

is vital in building relationships and working collaboratively. Interpersonal communication

skills of the principals as identified by the teachers are needed to build a collaborative

culture.

Implications

Based on the findings of this study, there are implications for principals, policy-

makers, school districts, and classroom teachers. They are in a position to make a change

and implement change.

Principals are considered the instructional leaders of the schools. It goes without

144

saying the principal is that source that has an impact on the direction of the school as well

as individuals that trust his or her supervision. With that, goes a great responsibility to

get the job done in a respectful and a professional manner. The implication here is that

principals need to become aware of the emotions of others and how he or she provokes

those emotions. Another implication for principals is that he or she must constantly

interact with teachers as a team player not as a boss. Finally, principals must be reminded

that a leader builds, not tears down: inspires, not discourages: offers help, not criticism:

and offers hope, not despair.

This study has shown that teachers’ performance is being influenced by the

interpersonal communications skills of their principals. All schools are required to meet

the expectations of No Child Left Behind Act by 2014. The implications for policy-

makers are that funding may be allocated to help principals develop those interpersonal

communication skills that they need to impact teachers’ performance in a positive way.

When teachers are impacted positively, students will be impacted as well.

School districts need to put in place a system of principals’ evaluation that

includes input from teachers. This may help principals stay abreast on how they are

being perceived by their teachers. As a result, they can work on weak areas of

interpersonal communication skills.

Teachers are the force in the classroom that promotes success or failure. The job

of the teacher is not taken lightly. Teachers need to put in place a support system. This

support system is not a mentoring system, yet mentoring is included. Teachers must come

together to encourage and to inspire one another when things are looking down and

looking up. The life of a teacher has been described as lonely and isolated. It doesn’t

145

have to be when teachers purposely form a power system of encouragement and

inspiration.

Recommendations

This study has yielded a wealth of information and yet there is still a greater need

to expand this research. Further study could: examine the relationship between

personalities of principals and poor or good interpersonal communication skills; examine

the role of a principal’s age in demonstrating interpersonal communication skills;

examine those interpersonal communication skills that improve teacher performance;

show the relationship between different genders of principals and their interpersonal

communication skills. Future investigations should be designed` to include more

participants of a variety of race and gender and to include unlimited geographical areas.

Dissemination

The results of this research will interest diverse audiences. The findings from this

study will be offered to investigators through electronic dissertation files. Principals and

aspiring principals will find connections to this study as they are challenged with the task

of developing, sustaining, and maintaining productive interactive relations in the teacher

principal dyad. Moreover, the finding may be reported in faculty meetings, to groups of

principals, and to school boards. Educators may find a wealth of information concerning

the interpersonal communication behaviors of principals that will aid in efforts to reform

and improve the performance of schools. This study offers teachers motivation and

encouragement as they continue to remain faithful to the profession and to the children.

This research adds to the educational literature by identifying those interpersonal

communication skills that teachers believe have an impact on their performance. By

146

identifying these interpersonal communication skills that impact teacher performance,

school leaders are provided with the knowledge needed to improve the skills necessary

for a productive and effective school.

Concluding Thoughts

Many thoughts came to mind as I bring closure to this study. First, those

principals who have excelled in demonstrating interpersonal communication skills have

experienced a school where teachers were functioning in a climate conducive to teaching

and learning. These teachers experienced greater work satisfaction and were open with

their principals. They have been empowered to excel because they have been valued and

respected by their principals. From this study, we have seen the evidence that teachers

will extend themselves beyond expectations when interaction is positive, respectful, and

trusting.

Secondly, those principals who had not demonstrated good interpersonal

communication skills experienced teachers who chose not to extend themselves beyond

expectation. Because of this, the classroom setting became a place where the best

teaching did not take place. Principals who demonstrated poor interpersonal

communication skills have demonstrated poor leadership skills. These principals were

more like bosses and not team players. When leadership interacted in positive ways,

teachers were inspired to move beyond mediocre work. Most teachers were willing to

move beyond mediocrity.

Additionally, principals affected teacher performance in one way or another

regardless of their ability to demonstrate interpersonal communication skills effectively.

All principals have the potential to affect the quality of work, attitudes, and behavior of

147

teachers, thus, requiring school leaders to accept and perform such a responsibility.

Finally, good interpersonal communications skills of principals are essential in

meeting school goals. The study brought a greater awareness of the importance of

interpersonal communication skills in the principal-teacher dyad. With this in mind,

principals must understand that developing and demonstrating good interpersonal

communication skills in day-to-day activities is crucial in creating an effective school.

School excellency is conferred to those principals who have demonstrated effective

interpersonal communication skills that improve teacher performance.

Students also viewed