African Journal of Business Management Vol. 6(28), pp. 8235-8242, 18 July, 2012 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM DOI: 10.5897/AJBM09.

280 ISSN 1993-82332012 Academic Journals

Review

Moral leadership in school organization

Vehbi elik
Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Mevlana University, Konya, Turkey. E-mail:vehbicelik@gmail.com. Tel: 0090 3322655679.
Accepted 16 March, 2011

Leadership approaches in administration have brought new points of view into leadership. Moral leadership is one of the mostly stressed leadership approaches like visionary leadership, strategic leadership, instructional leadership, and transformational leadership. Different from other leadership approaches, moral leadership depends on moral authority. Moral leadership is the process of forming and developing moral values and principles and leading the followers to act according to moral values. School leaders, who can not perform morally focused leadership behaviors, may lead the school to a process of moral pollution. Moral pollution will make the school an organization far from being faithful. Moral pollution means the extinction of moral values. Corrosion of moral values will cause moral chaos at school. In such a position, moral leadership will be more necessary. In this study, moral leadership in education and school leaders moral leadership behaviors are analyzed in various aspects. Key words: Moral leadership, school leadership, school principals, social justice. INTRODUCTION Moral leadership involves leading in a manner that respects the rights and dignity of others. In a postmodern world of globalization, the cultural, political and economic ties among communities and organizations have become increasing blurred and interdependent. Principals are expected to attend to not only the professional capacity of teachers, insctructional quality student achievement accountability demands, but also the needs and requests of children and families of culturally, racially, linguistically and economically diverse backgrounds (Easley, 2008). Moral leadership is a kind of leadership that depends on moral authority. Moral leadership reflects a leadership approach that is focused on character and that is united with moral values. Character is called the whole set of moral behaviors of a person. The fact that moral leadership focuses on character, is the explanation of the importance of personal characteristics for this leadership approach. THE CONCEPT OF MORAL LEADERSHIP In moral leadership, modesty is one of the basic personal characteristics for a high quality leadership. Modesty is not the extinction of power, but using it in a controlled way and performing it rationally (Knights and OLeary, SCHOOL MANAGEMENT IN RISK SOCIETY Educational administration in the 80s was much different from todays. This difference was not a rather structural 2006). Reisck et al. (2006) took moral leadership as ethical leadership and set six principals for moral leadership. These are as follows; character and unity, moral awareness, being society intended, motivating, encouraging, transferring authority and administrating moral accountability. Greenfield by analyzing the studies held in the field of school administration between the years 1979 and 2003, regarding moral leadership saw that these studies rather focus on personal dimensions and try to explain social relations of school leaders. According to Greenfield, moral leadership is all about forming a social relations structure. Moral leadership at schools depends on the basis of social, historical and cultural relations (Greenfield, 2004). Sergiovanni (1992) accepted moral leadership as the heart of leadership. The heart of leadership reflects the values, beliefs and desires of moral leadership. The leaders brain reflects his mental capacity. Moral leadership is shaping the brain of the leader according to his heart.

8236

Afr. J. Bus. Manage.

or administrative one. Risk factors, getting widespread day by day, made our world more risky. German sociologist Beck wrote a book named Risk Society in 1992. According to Beck, risk society prepared the end of nature and tradition (Ball, 2003). In risk society unreliability replaced reliability. Reliability among people weakened. Schools started to become less faithful organizations. Losing reliability in relations increased social risk. People began not to rely on each other in many ways. In 1980s parents left their children to school saying Flesh yours; bones mine. (Turkish idiom meaning: I trust you so much). Todays parents are leaving their children to school in anxiety. Schools, in a society under risk, become less faithful day by day. School leaders of today are more under risk than those of 1980s. There is a serious increase in violence and discipline problems. The problems of violence and discipline are among the problems a school leader initially has to deal with. Educational administrators of today cant sit at their desk. School leaders may face an unexpected problem any time. An important part of violence incidents at schools are caused by people other than the students of those schools. School leaders have little authority in providing the security of schools. Schools must be reliable organizations in order to be effective organizations. Schools must be organizations of security rather than organization for children of disadvantageous surroundings as provinces. Children of socio-economically suffering families and departed couples have more tendency to violence. An educational leader must identify these children and provide social education programs for them. However, it is impossible for a school leader to solve the problems of children at risk group with only on his own effort. Here, school leaders must have an effective cooperation with teachers and parents. School leaders act according to instructive leadership behaviors and at the same time must struggle with risk factors that endanger the school system. Schools which are under more risk lose their reliability. Parents seek not only education quality but also a reliable and strong school culture while choosing a school for their children. High schools are facing intense discipline problems as educational organizations. Gangster groups formed, drug usage, stabbing and fights are among the widespread problems at high schools. High school students are teenagers, and these are the years of crucial importance in gaining a character for every person. Teenagers who struggle with negative environmental effects are under risk more than others. Teenagers, who are under risk, are likely to be threats for school leaders, teachers and students. As teenagers want to behave independently in their own worlds, the probability of risk increases, because over-individualistic behaviors trigger egoism and uncertainty. Teenagers of this time have more tendencies

to decide to do everything on their own. Overindividualism weakens social values and norms that control individuals behaviors. As a result of these, the teenagers become a matter of risk for their own environments and schools. Here, school leaders have crucial roles. They should not act in a passive mood in such a condition. They must be aware of the environment and follow conscious risk administration behaviors in order to prevent schools from environmental risk factors. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND MORAL LEADERSHIP Students from disadvantageous environments experience more societal isolation than others. This also affects them negatively at school. Students of the risk group face important problems while continuing their education. One important behavior expected from the school leaders of today is to present the opportunities of school to such students as much as possible. The opportunity of students from lower socioeconomical environments or suburbs to attend to quality schools is considerably weak. Students under risk most possibly will go to lower quality schools. Unless educational administrators prepare suitable environments to such students, they will face another inequality. For instance, they will be taken into most unsuccessful classes in a school where classes are grouped according to school success levels. Moral leaders must ensure social justice at school instead of producing injustice. It is not easy to describe social justice. It can be described from various different aspects. Social justice is to deliver opportunities, rights, and responsibilities among individuals equally. Social justice aims to discharge the obstacles individuals are likely to face individually and as a group rather than being a structural process. It includes everybody, but focuses on making disadvantageous persons opportunities better (Ryan, 2006). The bureaucratic structure of schools supports unreliability. The relationship, which occurs in the formal structure of schools, causes social hierarchy and this triggers social injustice. A school leader has a privileged position in the formal structure of school (Ryan, 2006). If an educational administrator uses this privileged position as a forcing power on teachers and students, he himself infringes social justice. Educational leadership requires preserving social justice and developing horizontal relationships. A moral leader must ensure equality in educational opportunities for disadvantageous students. Providing social justice for disadvantageous students and students under risk is as important as forming a safe environment for them. In order to provide peace and safety at schools, it is necessary to provide social justice first. Who will meet poor students needs at school? School leaders can make use of opportunities of the environment to meet

ELK

8237

Figure 1. Organizational pollution.

such students needs. A school culture must be formed without taking into consideration the differences as gender, race, language, beliefs, and social position. Social justice doesnt require forming a unique social culture. Social justice requires considering differences. Administrating and considering differences means to accept a multi-cultural education. A school leader objects to all kinds of discrimination at school and try to form a school culture that is participative and considers differences. Schools of contemporary world have to consider differences and welcome everybody (Blackmore, 2006). It is possible to provide social justice with effective moral leadership. A school leader must try to form a school culture suitable especially for students from disadvantageous environments and consider basic ethical principles such as honesty, respect, and equality. A moral leader tries to establish social justice equally among teachers and students. If a school leader uses the opportunities of school in favor of students of rich families, he causes a new inequality at school. Social justice must be tried to be provided by giving priority to students under risk. Otherwise, being unable to provide social justice will make students under risk behave unethically. ORGANIZATIONAL POLLUTION The concept of pollution is often thought to be a physical one. Different from environmental pollution, organizational pollution is described as moral pollution. Organizational pollution increases in an atmosphere where moral values are corroded, crime incidents increase and moral principles are infringed. We can classify factors causing organizational pollution in two groups as internal and external factors. External moral pollution is a kind of pollution caused by an external

surrounding with low moral levels. How high the moral pollution in the external surrounding of an organization is, that much will the moral pollution increase. For example, in districts with high crime levels, moral pollution and organizational pollution increase. Internal pollution is caused by the unethical behaviors of people working at an organization. Organizational pollution level of an organization is affected by external and internal pollution. Figure 1 outlines how organizational pollution occurs. Organizations may sometimes harm their environments, whereas they produce goods and utility. Organizational effectiveness requires being sensitive to the environment. Schools, as educational organizations, must have environmental sensitiveness at the utmost level. This sensitiveness includes environmental responsibilities as keeping the surrounding clean and not making too much noise. As schools must be sensitive to environmental pollution, they must also be sensitive to organizational pollution. A school that is sensitive to environmental pollution but neglects organizational pollution is far from meeting the expectations of the society. A moral leader tries to prevent organizational pollution. A school leader who is sensitive to moral problems has the ability to see the factors causing organizational pollution. A moral leader forms a strong ethical culture at school. In an ethically strong school culture, organizational pollution is prevented. In a school where organizational pollution is high it is hard for a school leader to show moral leadership behaviors. A school leader may be helpless in the face of numerous unethical behaviors. However, a school leader has to struggle hard in order to form an effective educational and instructional environment. The need for moral leadership is closely related with organizational pollution level. If unethical behaviors are numerous in an organization, this may cause a chaos. In such an occasion stronger ethical leadership behaviors

8238

Afr. J. Bus. Manage.

may be needed. On the other hand, in an organizationally clear culture, preserving the situation of the time may be privileged. In a clear culture a school leader not only preserves school culture of the time, but also tries to develop it. THE NECESSITY OF MORAL LEADERSHIP Ethical dizziness in a globalizing world has affected education as many other fields. Today there are serious ethical problems faced in fields like medicine, communication, trade, and education. Beside the ethical problems between the administrators and teachers, there are ethical problems between teachers and students especially while trying to provide discipline in the class. In this changing world, not only the organizations but also the expectations, perceptions, and beliefs of those who administrate these organizations change. Therefore, in the new world order, some ethical rules must be set in order to support this change. Schools have to set new ethical rules considering the norms of the time as ethical organizations. Otherwise, schools that can not change morally will face serious dilemmas and conflicts in the applications of ethical rules. In this point, schools are in need of a strong moral leadership. When moral leadership is taken from the aspect of school systems in education, it must include political, social, cultural and historical dimensions at a very large context. It is fundamental for the schooling system to take these entire dimensions as a whole in order to meet the 21st centurys political, economical and cultural standards (Starrat, 1999). In this changing world, not only do the organizations but also expectations, perceptions and believes of people managing the organizations change. Therefore, this change must be supported by forming ethical principles. Schools as ethical organizations, have to develop new ethical principles parallel to the needs of the age. Otherwise, a school, which can not ethically develop, will face serious dilemmas and conflicts in applying ethical principles. Today the ethical leadership of the administrators became of crucial importance in innovating and developing the school. Ethical quality of a school depends on the ethical leadership quality of a school leader. A school must develop ethical principles together with increasing the quality of education. A school must not only help teachers, leaders, parents and students to use their mental energy but also nurture their ethical energy (Beck and Murphy, 1994; Sarason, 1996; Sizer, 1996). In order to increase the quality of education, schools are in a serious competition and effort. Generally, success of primary schools in Turkey is evaluated with the number of students passed the high school entrance exams and parallel to this, high schools with the number

of students passed the university entrance exams from their graduates. Placing graduates to some quality schools may be one of important quality indicators in evaluating the success levels of schools. However, education quality of schools can not be determined with a unique indicator. School effectiveness must be determined with multi-factor criterions. Schools exist for students and have to give all kinds of support for their development. The basic mission of schools is to help students mental, social, psychological and moral development. However, schools losing this basic mission became foundations to fulfill only instructional targets. In such a situation, emotional, social and moral development of students became inferior to these targets. An approach mostly depending on the intelligence quotient (IQ) and ignoring the emotional quotient (EQ) harms the respect shown to schools and make them risk producing foundations. When will schools invest students moral development? The facts that schools are under risk, social violence incidents and discipline problems are increasing all indicate that it is high time we invested on moral development. A research held in the U.S. on 1600 students show that 85% of girls and 76% of boys faced sexual harassment at schools. Students experienced such incidents have mental problems and their school performance decreases (Dupper and Adams, 2002). Students maltreated by teachers have psychological problems. Some oppressive discipline and control techniques are applied on the psychologically maltreated students. Such students have difficulty in establishing effective communication with their environment. Students maltreated by teachers show undesired behaviors. Morally unhealthy schools may turn into environment of chaos and violence. Anarchy is seen at schools where moral balance is disordered. MORAL ECOLOGY There is a balance between life and nature and moral environment has an important place in this balance. Harmony in life depends on harmony in this moral environment. Problems like violence, drugs, sexual harassment, alienation and weakness in family relations caused by modern culture leaves us in mass of moral problems. Social life rather serves egoism, jealousy, lust and aggressiveness. The environment and its moral ecology have collapsed, because an immoral and rude environment for teenagers forms a culture that includes more violence. In this process of pollution, television serves as a vehicle that pours out toxic churns (Hertzke, 1998: 630). Teenagers drinking irresponsibly at parties make cultural pollution more common. Crazy behaviors of teenagers at parties temporarily make them relaxed and cause them get lost in the process of moral pollution.

ELK

8239

High Trust Society (High trust-low-risk) Trust Level Risk Society Low Low High
Figure 2. The relationship between trust society and risk society.

(Low trust- high risk-) Risk Level

Moral pollution, a result of this cultural crisis, harms relations within families and society and terminates sustainable values. In such a position, social capital which depends on trust faces a dramatic decrease. Family and social relations depend on trust. Societies with low trust levels are always under great risk. In Figure 2 the relationship between trust society and risk society is outlined. People can have healthier relations in a social environment that depends on trust. Trust is the basic for social capital. Trust may be fed among individuals, groups and between individuals and groups, and individuals and society. As a social learning, trust means the appreciation of individuals behaviors and experiences. Moreover, trust helps the establishment of a moral system for an individuals life to be understood (Paxton, 1999). Students under risk and in low trust levels face a high pollution in moral environment. Social relations lose naturalness and fake social relations come into being as a result of weakness in relations of trust. Students whose moral environments are polluted face a chaotic moral system. Moral chaos cause teenagers experience dilemmas as it corrodes the values and norms. Teenagers in such a position can not decide between right and wrong and make their decisions depending solely on their individual values. Effective ethical decisions can be made in a suitable moral environment. The ethical decisions are often wrong in organization where moral pollution is high. One of the factors causing moral pollution is using women as trade substances. In a moral ecological environment full of pornography there is a serious increase in sexual abuse incidents. Individuals leave moral values in polluted moral environment (Hertzke, 1998). Individual independency is seen as the major cause of moral collapse (Hertzke, 1998). With the declaration of independency centered rights, individual independency

was developed and sanctified. Independent individuals began to threaten social health. There is a relationship between physical and moral environments. Harmony in physical and moral environments will help individuals live in healthier social environments. A corruption in moral environment will confuse an individuals mind and encourage unethical behaviors. Moral leadership requires keeping a balance between physical and moral environments. School leaders as moral leaders should follow strategies to prevent school from moral pollution. Moral leaders should be alert to external and internal factors threatening school. A school leader who does never get out of his room can not develop moral awareness behaviors. If a school leader analyses internal and external factors causing moral pollution at school well, he can assure a cleaner moral environment. Schools are moral organizations. School leaders have to behave according to the principles of moral organizations. A school leader not behaving ethically can harm a schools moral system (Sergiovanni, 2000). A school leader is to meet the expectations of different groups. Therefore, a school leader must try to act with zero mistakes to meet the expectations of teachers, students and parents. Moral leadership does not let one to make many mistakes. Some administrative decisions of a school leader may be tolerated. On the other hand, moral mistakes are really hard to be ignored. MORAL LEADERSHIP ACCOUNTABILITY AND MORAL

Moral leadership concentrates rather on preservation and application of moral values than rational behaviors. Moral leaders are the ones who have moral values and struggle to spread them. The relationship between leaders and their followers is a highly sensitive one in moral

8240

Afr. J. Bus. Manage.

leadership. Moral leaders are not the ones who hide their moral problems from those they administrate. Moral leaders can not say This is my personal problem. about his moral problems, because followers are perfect observers and they watch every single behavior of their leaders. Unethical behaviors of a leader harm his authority. Moral leaders must be transparent about their personal assets, family life, and social relations and must bear the responsibility of moral accountability. Moral accountability reflects the responsibilities of a leader in the society among those he leads. Leaders always try to give account to their seniors in bureaucratic culture. However, in moral leadership it is more important to morally give account to the inferiors rather than just to seniors. Organizational justice requires preserving the rights of inferiors and to be honest in decision making process. Moral authority of a leader who is not just to his inferiors is always under serious threats. A moral leader who takes justice and honesty as a principle never hesitates in moral accountability. Moral accountability requires awareness in solving moral problems. Moral insensitivity may lead to serious problems. While, the moral responsibility of a moral leader may be at the minimum level in some organizational activities, it may also be at the maximum level in some other activities. A morally insensitive person may cause chaos. Employees may face some moral dilemmas because of uncertainty in moral criterions and leaders insensitivity to moral problems (Geva, 2006). Moral leaders criticize themselves in their decisions and activities and try to stay away from morally costly behaviors. Schools are organizations that must be extremely sensitive in moral accountability. School leaders and teachers have to be much more sensitive about the responsibility of moral accountability than other vocational groups. Moral accountability forms a very strong inner control mechanism in an individual. This inner control mechanism decreases the possibility of displaying immoral behaviors. For instance, if a school leader has an emotional relationship with one of the teachers at school, he may end his professional career. The organizational prestige of a school, whose organizational character is stigmatized, may drop to the minimum level (Mcwilliam and Perry, 2006). Moral accountability may lead a school leader to a peace inside him. As a moral leader, a school leader has to show the teachers that he does not have any secret or dirty actions. If a school leader can give the teachers account of what he did, then it will be more plausible for him to call the teachers to account. SCHOOL CULTURE AND MORAL LEADERSHIP School culture is the set of unwritten rules in a school. A schools values, norms, habits, beliefs, and symbols are

the basic elements to form a school culture. School culture shapes not only the organizational philosophy of a school, but also teacher behaviors. Ethical values also, are seen as a part of school culture. What will the position of ethical values and principles be at a school then? Will the ethical values be up to school leaders, teachers and students discretion? Certainly, individuals have some ethical values. As individuals have ethical values, organizations also have some ethical values at the organizational level. Organizational ethics sets all the principles and values all employees are to adapt themselves. Every single school constitutes an ethical values system suitable for its own culture. Ethical values are meaningful in the aspect of school culture, only if they are accepted at the organizational level rather than individual level. School culture can serve the change of cultural values, if it has an innovator spirit. Ethical principles do not change, but ethical values may. With the change of school culture, ethical values of a school also change. As ethical leaders, school leaders must adapt organizational ethics to contemporary needs. It is impossible for the ethical values to live and enrich a schools organizational life without integrating with school culture. Shared ethical values guide behaviors at ethical schools (Starrat, 1991). Effectiveness and validity levels of ethical values to be applied at schools are important. Are there universal ethical values? If so, how can these values be used in forming a wise school? How can a school culture be formed according to universal ethical values? It is hard to be able to give certain answers to these questions. The term good school may mean different concepts in different cultures. The qualities considered for a good school in a country may not fit the description of a good school in another country. The concept of good school was sometimes used as a synonym for effective, fertile, and success oriented schools. Some researchers have found productive values and ethical/humanistic values (Jackson et al., 1993). The concept of good school has not only been used in economical meaning but also in the meaning of ethical schools for the recent past. Good school concept is tried to be taken together with the set of ethical values to be found in wise schools. DEMOCRATIC SCHOOLS AND MORAL LEADERSHIP Gary Hamel says: Crisis is on the top of the bottle. and states the critical role of the administrators in the aspect of ethical leadership. Democratic attitudes of administrators help the application of participative administration. How little an administrator includes his inferiors to decision process that little the inferiors will tell their opinions. Famous philosopher Sartre asks: Is there anyone who dealt with administration and kept his hands clean? Certainly, there are leaders showing effective ethical

ELK

8241

leadership behaviors. There are lots of leaders known of their honesty. However, there are also leaders who see their administrative position as their personal possession and use organizational sources for their own personal profit. Success in ethical leadership depends not only on personally having a good character, but also setting a clean culture at the organizational level. Character is essential for effective leadership. Josephson (2000) explains the power of character as follows: administrators must be clever, hardworking, and innovators. On the other hand, however, much clever and professional the administrators are, they also have to have strong ethical principles. The need for ethical leaders is getting more and more important in a world where an image formed in decades may be lost in a single night. If an ethical leader reflects only his own character to the organization and tries to form a parallel ethical culture, he becomes a dictator. In such an organization, organizational ethics becomes a reflection of the leaders character. In the conventional administration philosophy, students are at the lowest levels of the administrational pyramid as customers. If employees always care about pleasing the leader, all the energy of the organization is directed to the top of the hierarchy. In this philosophy, employees who deal with the customers do nothing but keep on saying conventional statements like; This is our organizational policy. I am also an orderly person (Blanchard, 2001). At schools administrated depending on ethical principles and values, ethical expectations of students are taken into consideration. Ethical values are not reported as unchangeable truths from top to the bottom, but taken as values shared with teachers and students. Democratic school leaders have to be more faithful to teachers and students than to the head of education in the province. Every leader is loyal to his superiors. The thing more important than this is showing the same loyalty to his inferiors. Democratic behaviors require clearness and transparency. There is closeness and secrecy in autocracy. If the policies followed, the rules applied, and the administrative actions at a school are known by teachers and students, at least there will be no doubts about the leaders. A school leader has to take emotionality into consideration as well as rationality (Fullan, 1998). The application of ethical principles at school requires an effective emotional administration. School leaders arent inspectors to check teachers and students moral behaviors, but only a member of school team that follows ethical rules. CONCLUSION Moral leadership is a kind of leadership that depends on moral authority. Ethical dimension of leader behaviors is more important then their rationality in moral leadership. Effect and responsibility areas of moral leadership are

considerably wide. The direction of development in moral leadership is not external to internal but internal to external. There is a balance between internal and external dimensions of behaviors. A school leader, who could not attain integrity internally, can not set organizational ethics outside. Accomplishments of organizational and social responsibilities in moral leadership depend on the establishment of a safe inner balance. Effective moral leadership requires the application of ethical principles at the organizational level together with caring values personally. Moral leadership doesnt operate free from school culture. Ethical principles will be constant only in a culture that will sustain them. School leaders can skillfully settle ethical principles and values into school culture. The application of universal ethical principles such as equality, justice, respectfulness, and human rights will form a more meaningful working environment at school (elik, 2003). Social balance at school is not always stable. Schools can also experience chaos. Chaos doesnt result from only economical reasons such as low productiveness. Serious ethical problems faced at schools may lead to chaos. In chaotic environments, ethical leaders play important roles when serious problems are experienced. Moral leadership should be taken more seriously in programs for school administration. School leaders success on making organizational life more meaningful depends on their success in moral leadership. Unsuccessfulness in moral leadership costs dearly. A school image gained in years may corrupt with an unethical behavior of a school leader. Moral leadership is a leadership behavior to be shown in order to strengthen the social image of a school.
REFERENCES Ball JS (2003). The risk of social reproduction: The middle class and education markets. London Rev. Educ., 1(3): 163-175. Blackmore J (2006). Deconstructing diversity in the field of educational management and leadership. Educ. Manage. Adm. Lead, 34(2): 181199. Blanchard K (2001). Hizmet tutkusu ve liderlik (Service Passion and Leadership), Executive Excellence, p. 46. Beck LG, Murphy J (1994). Ethics in educational leadership programs: An expanding role Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press . elik V (2003). Eitimsel liderlik (Educational leadership), Ankara: Pegem A Yaynclk. Dupper BL, Adams NM (2002). Low level violence: A neglected aspect of school culture. Urban Educ., 37(3): 350-364. Easley J (2008). Moral school building leadership. J. Educ. Adm., 46(2): 25-38. Fullan M (1998). Reshaping school leadership. Educ. Lead, 55(7): 6-10. Hertzke AD (1998). The theory of moral ecology. Rev. Polit., 60(4): 629659. Geva A (2006). A Typology of Moral Problems in Business: A Framework for Ethical Management. J. Bus. Ethics, 7(3): 133-147. Greenfield JW (2004). Moral leadership in schools, J. Educ. Adm., 42(2): 174-196. Jackson P, Boostrom R, Hansen D (1993). The moral life of schools, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Josephson MS (2000). Karakter: Liderliin temel ta (Character: The

8242

Afr. J. Bus. Manage.

Cornerstone of Leadership), Executive Excellence, p. 40. Knights D, OLeary M (2006). Leadership, ethics and responsibility to the other. J. Bus. Ethics, 67(2): 125-137. Mcwilliam E, Perry LA (2006). On being more accountable: The push and pull of risk in school, Lead.Int. J. Lead. Educ., 9(2): 97-109. Paxton P (1999). Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment. Am. J. Soc., 105(1): 88-127. Reisck CJ, Hanges PJ, Dickson MW, Mitchelson JK (2006). A Crosscultural examination of the endorsement of ethical leadership. J. Bus. Ethics, 63(4): 345-359. Ryan J (2006). Inclusive leadership and social justice for schools, Leadsh. Pol. Schools, 5(3): 3-17.

Sarason S (1996). Revisiting the culture of the school and the problem of change, Teachers College Press: New York. Sizer TT (1996). Horaces hope: What works for the American high school, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston. Starrat RJ (1991). Building an Ethical School: A Theory for Practice in Educational Leadership, Educ. Adm. Q., 27(2):185-202. Starrat RJ (1999). Moral dimensions of leadership. PT Begley, EL Pauline (Ed.). The values of educational administration, Falmer Press: London. Sergiovanni TJ (1992). Moral leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Sergiovanni TJ (2000). The lifeworld of leadership, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.