CHAPTER i01 i

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Leadership, ifrom ithe iearliest idays iof icivilization ito imodern itimes, ihas ibeen iessential iin iall

i aspects iof ilife, iincluding ieducational iinstitutions i(Bolman i& iDeal i1999). iThe ieducational

i institution ileaders iserving isecondary ischool istudents iare icharged iwith iproviding ithem iwith ithe

i knowledge iand ileadership iskills ineeded ito iorient ithem ifor ihigh ischool, icollege, iand icareer

i readiness i(Scheer i& iSafrit, i2001). iWith ithe igrowing ijob imarket idemand ifor ileaders ito ifill

i positions, isuch ias itechnology iexecutive, icommunication ispecialist, iand ileadership itraining iand

i development ispecialist, ischools iare ifaced iwith ithe iarduous ibut irewarding itask iof igrowing ieffective

i leaders ifor ithese i21st icentury iroles i(Sacks, i2009). i

Research ishows ithat i85% iof iAmericans ibelieve ithat ia iserious ileadership igap iexists iin ithe

i United iStates i(Purin, i& iMontoya, i2008). iParker i(2004) iurged ileaders iof ithe ieducational isystem ito

i prepare iadolescents ito ifill ifuture ileadership iroles iand ito imeet iwhat ithey idescribed ias ia i“leadership

i gap” iin ithe ijob imarket. iThis ileadership igap iis iperpetuated iand iperhaps iwidened iby inew idemands iof

i AJK istate iof iPakistan iimplementation iof ithe iCommon iCore iState iStandards i iin ipublic ischools ithat

i consume iclassroom iinstructional itime iin itesting istudent imastery iof ithe iCCSS iin iEnglish iLanguage

i Arts iand iMathematics i(Gutek, i& iVocke, i2011), ileaving iless itime ifor iactivities isuch ias ileadership

i development. i

However, ithe ileadership igap ican icreate iserious iconsequences ifor ithe ieconomic iviability iand

i security iof ithis icountry iand ishould ibe iaddress isooner, irather ithan ilater, iif ithe iUnited iStates iis ito

i retain isuperpower istatus iin ithe iglobal ieconomy i(Scheer i& iSafrit, i2001). iTrait itheory ioutlines ithe

i innate iqualities iand itraits ithat iindividuals iwith igreatness ipossess, isuch ias iheight, iintelligence,
 i fluency, iand ian ioutgoing ipersonality i(Wellman, i& iHumphrey, i2011). iKirkpatrick iand iLocke

i (1991) iagreed iwith itrait itheory ibut inoted isix itraits iand icharacteristics ithat idifferentiate ileaders ifrom

i non-leaders ibased ion itheir iqualitative isynthesis iresearch istudy. iThe isix itraits iare idrive, imotivation,

i integrity, iconfidence, icognitive iability, iand itask iknowledge.

1.1.1 Trait itheory

Stogdill i(2009) ichallenged itrait itheory iby iconducting ian ianalysis iof i124 itrait istudies

i performed ibetween i2007 iand i2009. iHe ifound ino idefinable itraits ithat idistinguished ia ileader ifrom ia

i non-leader. iHe isuggested ithat ithe isole ideterminant iof ia ileader iis inot ia icollection iof itraits ibut ithe

i ability ito iexecute iassigned itasks ieffectively. iHis iapproach isought ito idefine ithe ileader ibased ion

i adaptability ito isituational ifactors irather ithan iaspects iof ipersonality. iHowever, ihis isecond istudy, iin

i 1974, ifound ithat ipersonality iwas ia icritical ielement iof ileadership, iin iaddition ito isituational

i adaptability, ihence ivalidating isome ielements iof itrait itheory i(Jago, i1992).

In iaddition, iNorthouse i(2013) ibelieved ithat iintelligence, iself-confidence, idetermination,

i integrity, iand isociability iare iidentifiable itraits iand icharacteristics ithat icontribute ito ia iperson’s

i ability ito ibecome ia ileader. iFor ithe ipurpose iof ithis istudy, ithe itraits, isuch ias iintelligence, iself-

confidence, idetermination, iintegrity, iand isociability, iare ileadership icharacteristics iidentifiable iin

i secondary ischool istudents. iIn iaddition, ifor ithe ipurpose iof ithis istudy, ileadership itraits iand

i characteristics iare iused ionly iin ithe icontext iof istudent-perceived ileadership, iwhich iis iidentified iby

i the iteachers ithrough ithe iRenzulli-Hartman iLeadership iCharacteristic iScale i(Renzulli i& iHartman,

i 1998). iThe iRenzulli-Hartman iscale iwas ithe iinstrument iused iby ithe iteachers ito irate ithe istudents’

i leadership icharacteristics iwith ihigher ior ilower iscores. iBased ion ithe istudents’ iscores, ithey iwere

i placed iin ione iof ithe itwo iassigned istudent ifocus igroups.
1.1.2 Leadership iskills iapproach

I Since iresearchers ihave iestablished ithat itraits iand icharacteristics iare iinnate iand inot

i transferable, iKatz i(2011) ideveloped ithe ileadership iskills iapproach ito iinculcate ileadership iskills

i through iteaching iand ilearning. iHe iidentified ithree ibasic iskills ithat iare iimportant ito ileadership iskills

i development iin iadolescent istudents: i(a) itechnical iskills, i(b) ihuman iskills, iand i(c) iconceptual iskills.

i First, itechnical iskills iprovide iindividuals iwith ithe iknowledge ito iobtain icompetency iand

i proficiency iof ia itask ior iactivity. iIn iaddition, ithe iresearch iof iMumford iet ial. i(2010) iis iused iwith

i Katz’s iskills iapproach imodel ito iexpand ithe idevelopment iof ileadership iskills iof isecondary ischool

i students iinto ihigh ischool ias ia icontinuum iin ithe iprocess iof iacademic igrowth ito ispark icollege iand

i career ireadiness.

1.1.3 Transformational ileadership

i Transformational ileadership iis iused iextensively ito imotivate iand iimprove ithe ilives iof

i individuals. iResearchers inote ithat iBurns i(1978) ipropelled iTL iby ilinking iits ieffectiveness ito

i leadership i(Lowe i& iGardner, i2001). iBurns ibelieved ithat ia ileader iengages iwith ia ifollower ito icreate

i a ibond ithat iraises itheir ijoint ilevel iof imotivation iand imorality iin iorder ito iaccomplish ia igoal.

According ito iBass iand iAvolio i(1994), ithe ifour ifactors ithat itransformational ileaders i(TLs)

i can iemploy ito imotivate ifollowers iare: i(a) iidealized iinfluence, i(b) iinspirational imotivation, i(c)

i intellectual istimulation, iand i(d) iindividualized iconsideration.

Yukl i(2001) iadded ithat itransformational ileaders iempower ifollowers ithrough itraining iand

i skills idevelopment iby iproviding iaccess ito iinformation ithat ibuilds ia iculture iof iencouragement iand

i support.
1.1.4 Transformational ileadership iused iin iclassroom iinstruction

i Although itransformational ileadership, ias ipracticed itoday, iis ialigned iwith ideveloping

i employee iskills iin ithe iworkplace, iresearch iindicates ithat iit ican iapply iin ian ieducational isetting,

i given ithe isimilarities ibetween ithe itwo isituations i(Avolio i& iBass, i2008). iTransformational

i leadership iallows iteachers, ias ileaders, ito iengage iin iteaching ithat iprovides ithe istudents itheir

i followers iwith ithe iknowledge ito imaximize itheir ilearning ipotential i(Leverett, i2011). iThrough

i transformational ileadership, iteachers ican imotivate istudents ito irise iabove itheir iown iexpectations

i (Rosebrough i& iLeverett, i2011).

leadership idevelopment ifor isecondary ischool istudents icontinues ito ibe iless iof ia ipriority ithan

i for ihigh ischool iand icollege istudents, iresearch ihas ishown ithat ideveloping itheir ileadership ipotential

i enhance itheir iself-esteem iand iself-confidence, iwhich idrives ithem ito iaccept ileadership iroles iin ithe

i secondary ischool ienvironment i(Des iMarais, iYang i2010).

1.1.5 Leadership iand iadolescence

i Only iin ithe ilate i21th icentury ihas ithe itopic iof ileadership iand iadolescence igained ipopularity

i as ia iresearch iarea iof istudy. iResearcher’s iindiate ithat iin ithe ipast, iadults iin ithe iAJK idid inot ithink iof

i adolescents ias ileaders, ihence, ideveloping itheir ileadership iskills iwas inot ia ipriority i(MacNeil,

i 2006). iAccording ito iWade i(2007), ifamily iwas itraditionally ithe iarena iin iwhich ileadership iskills

i were ifirst iintroduced iand itaught ito iadolescents iand iyouth. iWade istated ithat ileadership iat ihome ifor

i adolescents itook ithe iform iof ilearned iresponsibilities isuch ias icleaning itheir irooms, isetting ithe itable,

i or itaking iout ithe itrash. iHe iwrote ithat idespite ithe ireality iof ihome-related itasks ias ia iway ito idevelop

i leadership, iadolescents iare iable ito idevelop ileadership itraits iand iemerge iinto ileadership iroles

i through imembership iin iorganizations ilike ithe iBoys iand iGirls iScout iprograms iand iother iafter-

school iprograms.
 Burton i(2013) irevealed ithat isociety irecognizes ithe ineed ito idevelop ileadership iskills

i beginning iin iearly iadolescents, ias ithis iwill isecure ia ifuture iof ileaders iprepared ito iaddress ithe

i complexities iof ithis icentury.

1.1.6 Leadership idevelopment iin isecondary ischools

i For ithe ipurpose iof ithis istudy, isecondary ischool, iaccording ito iShiner iand iDeYoung i(2009)

i involves ia iperiod iof iemotional, ibehavioral, iand isocial igrowth ifor iadolescents ias ithey itransition

i from ichildhood ito iearly iadulthood iand ifrom ielementary ischool ito isecondary ischool. iThese imajor

i life ichanges iin iadolescents’ ibiological iand isocial ilives, ias iwell ias itheir icognitive idevelopment,

i increase itheir iability ito icomprehend icomplex isituations. iThis itime iin ilife, iin iturn, iprompts

i adolescents’ idesire ito ibecome iindependent iindividuals. iSternberg i(2005) iwrote ithat ias icognitive

i skills idevelop iin iadolescents, ithey iare ieager ito ilearn iin itheir ischool ienvironment iand ito ifind itheir

i own iidentity ithat iis idistinct ifrom itheir iparents. iHe iobserved ithat ias ithey ienter iadolescence, ichildren

i are iforming itheir iown igroups. iSome iare ibecoming ileaders ias ithey iare ipulling iaway ifrom itheir

i parents, iand ithey iare iincreasingly imaking itheir iown ichoices.

1.1.7 Educational ileadership

Educational ileadership iinvolves iworking iwith iand iguiding iteachers itoward iimproving

i educational iprocesses iin isecondary iinstitution. iThose iin ieducational ileadership iroles itend ito igo

i above iand ibeyond ijust imanagement iand iadministrative itasks, ihowever. iThey iare itrained ito

i advanced iand iimprove ieducational isystem iand icreate iand ienact ipolicies. iEducational ileaders

i usually iare iimploded ias ischool iprincipals ior iadministrators ibut ican itake ion iadditional iroles, isuch ias

i department ichair ior iacademic idean. i

 Leadership iis ian iimportant ifunction iof imanagement iwhich ihelps ito imaximize iefficiency ito

i and ito ichive iorganizational igoals. i..Guidance ihere imeans iinstructing ithe isubordinates ithe iway ithey

i have ito iperform itheir iwork ieffectively iand iefficiently. iBy ideveloping ileadership iskills ithere iis ia

i great ibenefit ifor ithe istudents ias iwell ias iteachers. iThere iare ia ilot iof iresearches ion ideveloping

i leadership iskills iamong ithe istudents iat idifferent iacademic ilevels. iIn i21th icentury ithere iis ia igreat

i need iof ileadership iskills iat idifferent ilevels iof ieducation. i

1.2 Statement of problem

i i

The istudents iof isecondary ischool iare iat ithe ibrink iof iopportunities ito iplay itheir ileadership

i role. iThe iteacher ican iplay itheir ivital irole ito idevelop ileadership iamong ithe istudents iof isecondary

i schools. iIt iis irequired iand istudies ithe irole iof iteachers iin ideveloping ileadership iskills iin isecondary

i school ilevel istudents. I

1.3 Significance of the study

i i i i

The isignificance iof ithis istudy iis ito ihelp ifill ithe igap iin ithe iresearch iliterature ion ithe

i importance iof ideveloping ithe ileadership iskills iof isecondary ischool ilevel istudents. iThe ifindings iof

i the istudy ican ibe ia isource iof ibenefit ito iteachers, iadministrators, iparents, istudents, iand iother

i stakeholders iby ihighlighting iwhat iis ilearned iabout ileadership iskills idevelopment, ipeer ileadership

i and ifollowership, ias iwell ias igroup iinvolvement. iProviding iopportunities ifor isecondary ischool

i students ito igain iskills ithrough ileadership idevelopment iprepares ithem ito iexplore ithe iidea iof ihigher

i education iand ifuture icareers. iThe iresults iof ithis istudy ican ihelp iprovide ieducators iwith ia icourse iof

i action ito iimplement ileadership iskills idevelopment iin isecondary ischools.

1.4 Objectives of the study

i i i

The iobjective iof ithe istudy iwill ibe ifollowing

 To explore the leadership skills required for secondary school students.

i i i i i i i i i i
 To find out the role of secondary school teachers in developing leadership skills.
i i i i i i i i i i i i

1.5 Research hypotheses i

The iresearch ihypothesis iwill ibe ithe ifollowing

 The leadership skill is the special skill for secondary level students.
i i i i i i i i i i i

 There is a positive role of leadership skills at secondary level students.

i i i i i i i i i i i

1.6 Research Question i i

Research iquestions iof ithe istudy iwill ibe ithe ifollowing

1. Are current teaching strategies used for teaching of leadership skills conducive for social
i i i i i i i i i i i i

i developing iin istudents?

2. Are isecondary ilevel ischools iin iPakistan ihaving isufficient iaudio ivideo iaids ifor iteaching iof

i developing ileadership iskills?

1.7 Delimitation of the study i i i

Researcher idue ito ishortage iof itime iwill idelimited ito iDistrict iKotli, iand ithen imore ilimited

i the istudy ionly iconsider iTehsil iKotli. iIn iTehsil iKotli ionly ithe ipublic ischool iare iconsidered ifor

i collecting ithe idata.

1.7.1 Definitions iof iTerms

Teacher

Good iteachers inurture itheir iknowledge iand iskills ithrough iconstant iand ideliberate iefforts.

i One iof ithe iprerequisite ito ibe igood iteacher iis ito iunderstand ithe iteaching ilearning iprocess iin imore

i depth. iThis ifacilitates ibetter iappreciation iof ithe iteaching iprofession ias iwell ias ithe iprocess iof

i imparting ieducation. i(Ihsaa i– iET iUK-2007. iP53).

Administration: iSecondary ischool ilevel iprincipals iand iassistant iprincipals.

 Leadership iSkills: iTeenage ileadership iskills idevelopment itaught ithrough ithe imiddle ischool

i curriculum. i

Leadership iTraits/Characteristics: iThe icharacteristics iof ileadership iperceived iby ithe iteachers

i through ithe iRenzulli-Hartmann iLeadership iScale i(1976).

Secondary iSchool iStudent: iPreadolescents iand iadolescents iages i14 ito i17 ior iin ienrolled isecondary

i school igrades i11-12.

1.7.2 Research imethodology

This istudy iwill idesign ito idevelop ithe ileadership iskills iin iteaching ilearning iprocess. iIn ithis

i study ithe iresearcher iwill iuse iquestionnaires ifor icollection iof idata.

1.7.3 Population iof ithe istudy

The ipopulations iof ithis istudy iall ithe istudent iof iTehsil iKotli. iThe ipopulation ifor ithis istudy i150

i secondary ilevel istudents ifrom idifferent ipublic ischools iof iTehsil iKotli. i

1.7.4 Sample iof ithe istudy i

In ithis istudy ithe isample iwill iconsisted iof i100 istudents iof iTehsil iKotli.

1.7.5 Research iInstrument/ itools

Questionnaires imethod iof idata icollection iis ieasy iway ito icollected idata ifrom iteachers iand

i students.

1.7.6 Pilot iTesting

In iQuestionnaires iresearch iquestion iwill idevelop iby iresearcher iand iwill itried iout ifilling iby i10

i students iof isecondary ilevel iand i5 isecondary ischool iteachers.

1.7.7 Reliability iand iValidity

The iresearcher iwill icheck ieither ihis itool iis iaccording ito ithe iobjectives ior inot. iResearcher

i after ipilot itesting iwill ilook ithe iambiguities ithat iwill iconsist iin iquestionnaires iand iwill iremove
 i them. iFor ichecking ithe ireliability, ithe iresearcher iwill ilook ithat ithe iproduces iresults iwill isame ion

i repeated itrials. iThe iresearcher iwill imust icheck ithe ireliability iand ivalidity iof iinstrument ibefore ithe

i data icollection. i

1.7.8 Data icollection i

Data iwill ibe icollected ipersonally iby ithe iresearcher.

1.7.9 Data iAnalysis

The iresearcher iwill iapply ithe itest ianalysis ithe idata. iFor ichecking ithe irole iof iteacher iin

i developing ileadership iskills iin istudents. iThe iresearchers icollect ithe idata iteachers iof idifferent

i secondary ischools. iThe iresearcher iwill iapply ithe isuitable itest iin ianalysis iof idata. i

1.7.10 Findings/Results iof istudy

On ithe ibasis iof ianalysis iof idata, ithe ifindings iwill ibe idrawn. i

1.7.11 Results/ iConclusion

On ithe ibasis iof ifindings, ithe iconclusion iwas ireached iaccordingly. i

1.7.12 Recommendation

On ithe ibasis iof iconclusion iresults ithe irecommendation iwere imade iby ithe iresearcher.
 CHAPTER i2 i

2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

i i i

2.1 Introduction

This istudy iexamined ithe iimportance iof ideveloping ileadership iskills iat isecondary ischool

i level istudents ifrom ithe iperspective iof iadministrators, iteachers, iand istudents. iEmpirical iresearch

i demonstrates ithat ipolicy imandates iand isocial ibehaviors iwithin ithe ipublic ischool iculture ipose ia

i problem iand istymy ithe ileadership iskills igrowth iand idevelopment iof isecondary ischool istudents

i (Kress, i2006). iThe irecent imandate iof ithe iPakistan iState iCommon iCore iState iStandards ithat

i emphasize itesting iand iassessment ias ia ipriority iin ischools icontinues ito ibe ia ibarrier ito ithe ileadership

i development iof iall istudents iin isecondary ischools i(Leveret, i2011). ithis iexposition, ithrough ithe

i survey iof iwriting, iaddresses ithe isocial ipractices iof iyoung ipeople iin iregards ito iinitiative iversus ipeer

i followership, iyouths' isocial icharacter iimprovement, iand ithe ihesitance iof igrown-ups ito iallocate

i authority iassignments ito iteenagers, iwhich ifurther ihinders ithe idevelopment iof iadministration

i advancement iin ipuberty i(Sacks, i2009).

Research ithat irepresents itheir ifindings ipertaining ito ithe ibenefits isecondary ischool istudents

i can iderive iwhen itheir ileadership iskills iare ideveloped. iTwo ikey iresearchers iin ithis ieducation inoted

i the iimportance iof ileadership idevelopment. iFirst, iSacks i(2009) istated ithat ileadership ienhancement

i in ia ischool ienvironment idirectly iaffects istudent iachievement iscores, ias iwell ias ithe iidea ithat

i students ibelieve ithat ithe ioutcome iof itheir ileadership iopportunities iand igrowth ioccurs iwhen ithey

i earn ithe itrust iof iadults. iSecond, iSteinberg i(2005) irevealed ithat iadolescents iseek isocial iconformity

i with itheir ipeers ithrough igroup iaffiliation iand ithe iinteractions iwith ipeers iare iimportant iduring ithe

i adolescent idevelopmental istage. i

 In iorder ito icontribute ito ithe ieducational iinstitutions ion ileadership iskills idevelopment iof

i adolescents iin isecondary ischool, ithe iempirical iresearch irelates ito ileadership iskills idevelopment iof

i adolescents iand isupports iframeworks, iwhich iexamine ian iavenue ito isupport ithe iresearcher’s istudy.

i In ireviewing ithe iliterature ipertaining ito ileadership iand iadolescence, ia ilarge ivolume iof iliterature

i discussed iadult ileadership idevelopment, ias iwell ias ileadership idevelopment iin ihigh ischools iand

i post ihigh ischools iand ileadership iwith igifted istudents i(Klau, i2006; iMacGregor, i2007). iHowever,

i studies ispecifically itailored itoward ileadership iand iadolescents iin isecondary ischools iwere ilimited.

i Thus, ithis istudy iprovides imore iresearch iwhere ia igap iexists. i

Rosebrough iand iLeverett i(2011) istated ithat ischools imust iidentify iand iimplement ieffective

i strategies iin iorder ito iimprove istudent iacademic iperformance, idropout irates, iand iabsenteeism, iin

i addition ito ithe icommon istate istandards. iResearch ion ithe iPakistan iState iCommon iCore iState

i Standards i(2013) iindicates ithat istudents iin isecondary ilevel iand iabove iare irequired ito igain iexpertise

i in ireading, iwriting, ispeaking, ilistening, iand ilanguage. iMoreover, ithe istudents iare ialso irequired ito

i understand isocial imatters iand iphysical idevelopment iinherent iin ilearning i(CCSS, i2013). iMany

i states iimplement ithese istandards iin itheir ischools, iwhich iform iteacher iacademic iguidelines ifor

i measuring itest iscores iand iskills iof istudents i(Schroder iet ial., i2001). i

Within ithe ipublic ischool isystems iin iPakistan istate iof iAzad iKashmir, iteachers imust iutilize ithe

i curriculum iof ithe iCommon iCore iState iStandards. iHowever, ithe icommon icore icurricula ifor

i teachers iin isecondary ischools idoes inot iclearly idefine ihow ileadership iis itaught, iexcept ifor ia iminor

i amount iof iinformation iin ithe isocial istudies icurriculum iof icivic iresponsibility i(Ornstein iet ial.,

i 2011). i

The iresearcher, iin ian iattempt ito imaximize ithe ivariation iof ithe isampling, iselected ileaders ifrom ithree

i coeducational ischools, itwo iboys’ ischools, iand ithree igirls’ ischools. iSelected ileaders iwere istudied
i who iactively iengaged idirectly ior iindirectly iwith iestablished istudent ileadership iprograms iwithin

i their ischool icommunities. iThe iresearcher, ias ithe iinstrument iin idata icollection, iused ithree iopen-

ended iquestions ifor igathering ithe idata. iThe ileaders iwere iasked iabout ithe iconcept iof itheir

i understanding iof istudent ileadership iin ia iCatholic ischool iand iwhat ithey ibelieved ito ibe ithe imost

i appropriate iform iof istudent ileadership. iThey iwere ialso iasked ihow ithey ienvisioned ithe iteaching iof

i leadership iin itheir ischools i(Schroder iet ial., i2011).

The itheme ifindings irevealed ithat ithe ileaders iunanimously ibelieved ithat istudent ileadership

i was ian iintegral icomponent iof itheir ischools iand ithat ifostering ileadership iwas itheir iresponsibility.

i The ileaders ialso itook ia ipurposeful irole iin ithe iapplication iof istudent ileadership iat itheir ischool. iThey

i unanimously iagreed iwith iinvolving ithemselves idirectly iwith istudent ileaders iand iplanning ievents

i that idirectly ipromoted istudent ileadership, isuch ias ithe iplanning iand irunning iof ithe ischool iassembly

i by istudent ileaders. iOne iprincipal iindicated ithat imeetings iwith istudent ileaders i“Give istudent

i leaders ia ivoice iand ithe iopportunity ito istand iin ifront iof itheir ipeers iand ideliver ia ikey imessage”

i (Lavery i& iHine, i2013). i

The iresearchers idiscovered ithat isome iways ithese ileaders ihelped iestablish istudent ileaders

i was iby ihelping ithe istudents ito iacquire, idevelop, iand iexercise ileadership iskills. iThese iskills

i included iorganizational iskills, ipublic ispeaking iskills, iconfidence iand icharisma. iIn iaddition, ithe

i data iidentified ithat istudents iwere iexpected ito ispeak iout iand ido iwhat iis iright irather ithan iwhat iis

i popular, ias iwell ias ibecoming ia irole imodel iwithin ithe icommunity, iwhich iwas iidentified ias

i representing iservant ileadership. i

Findings ialso irevealed ithat ithe ileaders iunanimously iagreed ithat iteachers ishould ibe iactively

i involved iin ithe istudent ileadership iprograms, iwhich iincludes imentorship iroles iwith istudent ileaders,

i instilling ia isense iof iadvocacy iwithin ithe istudent ileader iand iremaining icommitted ito ithe iholistic
i development iof ithe istudents. iSome ileaders isaid ithey iconsidered iworking iwith istudents iin ielected

i leadership ipositions, iso ithey icould ibe imodels iof iexemplary ileadership ifor ipeers ito isee iand iemulate.

i Some ileaders iindicated ithat, i“They ineed ia ischool iculture iin iwhich ievery istudent ifeels ihe ior ishe iis ia

i leader iand iin iwhich iservant ileadership iis iprized” i(Lavery i& iHine, i2013, ip. i53). iThe ifindings

i indicate ithat ithe ischool ileadership isaid ithat ileadership iprograms ishould ibe iavailable ito iall istudents,

i so iall istudents ican ifeel ithat ithey ican ibe ileaders. iThe ifindings ialso irevealed ithat ithe ieight ileaders

i believed ithat itheir irole iwith istudent ileadership iwas ito iprovide ithem iwith iopportunities isuch ias

i school iand icommunity-based iactivities ithat iinstill ia isense iof ipurpose iand ipride iand igive ithem ia

i voice ito iexpress ithemselves iwith ithe isupport iand isupervision iof iadults. i

The ileaders iviewed istudent ileadership ias ia imajor ivalue ito ithe istudents’ ipersonal iacademic

i growth iand idevelopment iand ito ithe ipositive icultivation iof ischool iculture. iThe ileaders ibelieved ithat

i instilling ia iculture iof iservice ito iothers ithrough iservant ileadership, iand iproviding iopportunities ifor

i students ito iadminister ithese iservices ithrough iadvocacy iwas ivital. iThe ileaders ialso ibelieved ithat

i leadership iprograms igive istudents ithe iopportunity ito iacquire, idevelop, iand iexercise ileadership

i skills. iOne iprincipal inoted ithat ischool iculture idictates ithat iher irole iis ito ihave ian iexpectation iof

i excellence iin iher istudents, ithat ievery istudent iattending ithe ischool iis ia ipotential ileader, ithat

i developing ileadership iqualities iin ieach istudent iis ia ipriority, iso ishe iworks ito icreate iopportunities ifor

i the istudents ito idemonstrate itheir ileadership iqualities i(Lavery i& iHine, i2013). i

Researchers iand ischolars, iLavery iand iHine i(2013) ibelieved ithat itheir istudies ihad irelevance

i for iboth ipublic iand iprivate ischool ieducators iglobally, ias iall isecondary ischool istudents ipossess

i leadership ipotential iand ican iexperience ileadership iopportunities ifor igrowth iat iall ischools. iSacks

i (2009) iresearch istudy iexplored ithe ileadership iskills idevelopment iof isecondary ischool istudents.

i She iconducted ia imixed-method iqualitative iand iquantitative iresearch istudy iwhere ishe isought ito
i explore ileadership iand ileadership idevelopment ifrom ichildren iand iadolescents’ iperspectives ito

i create ia imodel ifor ileadership idevelopment iin iclassroom iinstructions.

Researcher iconducted ia istudy iin iAJK ithat iconsisted iof ia itotal isample isize iof i42 istudents.

i Phase i1 iof ithe ifocus igroups iconsisted iof i11 ischools, icomprising isix ielementary iand ifive isecondary

i schools iof isix ito ieight istudents iin ieach igroup, ifrom ieach iof ithe i11 ischools. iThe ileaders, ithrough ithe

i assistance iof ithe iguidance icounselors iand iteachers, iselected istudents ibased ion itheir ischool

i involvement iand ileadership. iThe iresearch iteam imade ithe idecision ito iconsult ithe ileaders ito iselect

i the istudents, ias ithey ibelieved ithe ileaders iwere ifamiliar iwith ithe istudents’ ileadership iskills icapacity.

i The iresearch igoal iwas ito ihave ia iselection iof istudents ithat irepresented ivarious ilevels iof ileadership

i development, isuch ias ian ioutgoing iclass ipresident ito ia ishy istudent. iThe iresearch iteam idid inot iwant

i to ihave istudents iself-select ifor ithe ifocus igroup ibecause ithey ifelt ithat itheir isample iwould ibe iheavily

i weighted iin ifavor iof ithe i“popular istudents,” ias iindicated iin iCoie iand iDodge i(1983). iThese

i researchers iindicated ithat ia isignificant irole iin ipeer iselection iof ileadership iwas irelated ito ipopularity.
i

The iparticipants iwere iasked ieight iopen-ended iquestions, iwhich iwere idesigned ito iallow

i students ito ispeak icandidly iabout itheir ischool ileadership ipertaining ito iwhat ithey iknow, ithe

i opportunities ithey iwere igiven, iand itheir iown ileadership iabilities. iSample iquestions ifor ithe istudy

i included ithe istudents’ idefinition iof ileadership, irole imodels iof ithose ithey iperceived ias ileaders, iand

i when idid ithey iidentified ithemselves ias ia ileader. iIn iaddition, istudents iwere iasked ito ianswer

i questions irelated ito itheir igeneral iunderstanding iof ileadership iand ileaders, ileadership iidentity,

i leadership idevelopment, iand ithe ioutcome iof ileadership iopportunities. i

Researcher inoted ithat iher istudy irevealed ithat isome istudents ibelieved ithat ianyone ican ibe ia

i leader iwhile iothers ibelieved ithat ileadership iis iabout iinherent itraits iand iqualities iand inot inecessarily
i related ito ibuilding ileadership iskills. iStudents ifelt ithat iteachers, ileaders, ifamily, iand ifriends iinspired

i them iand iwere ia icontributing ifactor ito itheir ileadership idevelopment. i

The imale iand ifemale istudents ivaried iin itheir iunderstanding iof ileadership. iFemale istudents

i indicated ithat imale istudents irefused ito ibe iidentified ias ileaders iwhen iengaging iin isuch iactivities ias

i fundraising iprojects ithat iattract imainly ifemale istudents. iThe iresearcher ialso inoted ithat ifemale

i students iin ithe istudy iembraced ileadership iprojects, isuch ias ifundraising, iand ithat i“if iboys iassist ithe

i girls, ithey iare iless irespected iand ilaughed iat iby itheir ipeers” i(Sacks, i2009). i

Other ifindings iby iresearcher irevealed ithat isecondary ischool ilevel istudents iwere ihappy iabout

i their ileadership iroles. iTeachers iwould iassign istudents ias ithe ileader iof icommittees ior ifundraising,

i and ithe istudents iwere isatisfied iwith ithe iroles iassigned ithem. iFindings inoted ithat ishy iand iinsecure

i students ibecame iconfident ileaders ias ithe iresult iof iteacher iencouragement iand ileadership itraining.

i Students isought iout iteachers ifor iencouragement, iopportunities, iand iinspiration. i

However, isome istudents iin ithe istudy ibelieved ithat ileaders iemerged ithrough iinherent itraits,

i while iother istudents ibelieved ithat iroles iand iresponsibilities imake ione ia ileader irather ithan ipersonal

i characteristics. iThe idata ifurther iconcluded ithat istudents, iwhose iconfidence iwere ienhanced,

i became imore iself-aware, ithus ideveloping itheir ileadership iidentity. iResearcher irecommended ithat

i students ilearn iand iapply ileadership-related iskills isuch ias iorganizational iskills, iproject iplanning,

i leading ia imeeting, iand iin ievaluating ia iproject. iShe iindicated ithat iher ifindings ireveal ithat iwhen

i students iare iactively iengaged iin ileadership iskills idevelopment iin itheir ischool iand ithe iexternal

i community, iit igave ithem ia isense iof imeaningful ipersonal iaccomplishment. iShe ialso ifound ithat

i gender iand iage iplayed ia ifactor iin ithe iperceptions iof istudents iin ithe istudy. iShe inoted ifor iexample,

i many iof ithe ifemale istudents ibelieved ithat ithey iwere ileaders ibecause ithey iset ian iexample iin ithe

i classroom iby idoing itheir iclass iwork iand iworking ihard ito isucceed iacademically. iHe ialso ifound iin
 i her istudy ithat isecondary ischool ilevel istudents iwere iassigned iroles iwith igreater iresponsibility iand

i less iteacher isupervision. i

Researcher iconcluded ithat isecondary ischool istudent iparticipants iunderstood ithe idynamics iof

i influence iand iauthority iin irelation ito itheir ipersonal ileadership iexperiences. iShe ibelieved ithat

i students iin igrades i11-12 iare iat ithe iright iage ito iinstill icivic iengagement, iwhich iis ia ikey iexperience

i in ileadership idevelopment. i

This iresearcher ifound isimilar ianswers ito iquestions ipertaining ito ileadership iin iSacks i(2009)

i study. iFor iexample, istudents iin iboth istudies ibelieved ithat ithey iwere ileaders iand ishared ithe isame

i enthusiasm iabout itheir iteacher-assigned itasks ipertaining ito itheir ileadership ichores. iIn iaddition, ithe

i need ito iprovide iopportunities ifor isecondary ischool istudents ito idevelop itheir iself-confidence iwas

i evident iin ithis iresearcher’s istudy.

The iambivalence iof iadults ito iassign ileadership itasks ito iadolescents iis ia iproblem iin ithe iwork iforce

i environment i(Kress, i2006). iKress iindicated ithat ithe iculture iof ithe iadult iworld iviews iadolescents

i only ias iconsumers iwho iare iincapable iof iperforming ileadership itasks. iKress ibelieved ithat ithis

i cultural istigma icould inegatively iaffect iadolescents iwho idemonstrate ileadership iskills ipotential iin

i the iclassroom iand iamong itheir ipeers. i

2.1.1 Social iidentity itheory

The ifirst itheory iused iin ithis istudy iis isocial iidentity itheory i(SIT) i(Tajfel i& iTurner, i1979).

i This itheory iexpounds ithe inotion ithat igroup iaffiliation iand ipeer iattachment idenies ipeer ifollowers

i with ithe iopportunity ito ibecome ileaders. iGroup iaffiliation iand ipeer iattachment icontinue ito ibe

i critical iturning ipoints ifor iadolescents ias ithey iseek ito idefine ithemselves ithrough itheir

i developmental igrowth iprocess i(Caldwell i& iO’Reilly, i2003; iKim, i2009). i

 According ito iTajfel iand iTurner i(1979), ithe iconsequences iof iindividual iaffiliation

i demonstrate iand ilead ito iin-group ifavoritism iand isigns iof idiscrimination iagainst ithe iout-group. iThe

i researchers istated ithat ithe icategorization iand iseparation iof ithe isocial igroups iresult iin ithe i“us”

i against i“them” imindset, ias ishown iin ian iexperimental istudy iknown ias ithe i“Kandinsky iand iKlee

i Experiment” i(Billing, iBundy, iFlament, i& iTajfel, i1971). iIn itheir istudy, iBilling iet ial. i(1971) iset iout

i to iinvestigate ithe iminimal iconditions iunder iwhich idiscrimination iand ifavoritism ibetween isocial

i groups icould iresult ithrough ipeer iinvolvement. iThey ialso isought ito idemonstrate iwhether ithe

i placing iof iindividuals iinto igroups i(categorization) iis isufficient ifor ipeople ito iharness ifavoritism iof

i their iown igroup iagainst imembers iof iother igroups. iThe iparticipants iwere i48 iadolescent iboys, iages

i 14-15 iyears. iThe iexperimenters idivided ithe iboys iinto ithe itwo igroups, ithe iKandinsky igroup iand ithe

i Klee igroup, iby irandomly iselecting i24 iboys ifor ieach igroup. iThe iboys iwere ishown i12 islides iof ia

i painting idrawn iby ieach iartist, iKandinsky iand iKlee iand iwere iasked ito iidentify iwhich ipaintings ithey

i liked iand idisliked. iThe ifindings irevealed ithat ieach iof ithe iboys iin ithe iKandinsky igroup iliked ithe

i paintings idrawn iby itheir iartist iand idisliked ithe ipaintings ithat iwere idrawn iby iKlee. iThe iKlee igroup

i also iselected itheir iartist’s ipaintings iover ithe iKandinsky ipaintings. iThe iresearchers’ ifindings

i revealed ithat igroup idecision isuggested ian iunderlying ieffect ion ifavoritism iand iconformity

i pertaining ito iadolescent iinvolvement iin itheir igroup iof iaffiliation, iwhich ialso idemonstrated ithe

i power iof ia iunited iforce ithrough igroup iaffiliation. iThis iexperiment icreated ithe ifoundation ifor isocial

i identity itheory iin iadolescence i(Billing iet ial., i1971). iThis iis iespecially icrucial igiven ithat ipeer igroup

i affiliation ithrough isocial iidentity ishapes ithe ibehavior iof ithe ideveloping iadolescent i(Piaget, i1965).

The ifindings iconcluded ithat iconformity ito ia ipeer igroup iwas ia idirect ieffect iof ithe iself-

esteem iof ithe iindividual iand ithe igroup ifrom iwhich ithe iadolescent iforms ipositive iassessments iand

i alignments ito isupport itheir ipeer igroup iactions i(Tajfel, i1970). iCuseo i(2002) iagreed iwith ithis
 i research iand iindicated ithat ipeer ifriendship iprovides ithe iadolescent iwith ia ivariety iof iopportunities

i for ilearning iand idevelopment ias iwell ias iproviding ia isense iof icompanionship, isocial idevelopment

i skills, ithe iability ito imanage iconflict iand icompetition, iand ian iopportunity ito iuse iproblem isolving

i skills iamong ithe igroup.

2.1.2 Transformational ileadership

The isecond itheory iused iin ithis istudy iis itransformational ileadership i(TL) i(Bass, i1985;

i Beauchamp iand iMorton i2011; iBurns, i1978; iDownton, i1973). iIt idescribes ihow ileaders iguide

i followers ito iattain itheir ifull ipotential iby iemploying iseveral ileadership iessentials i(Bass, i1985;

i Burns, i1978 i& iDownton, i1973). iThese iessentials iare iidealized iinfluence, iinspirational imotivation,

i intellectual istimulation, iand iindividualized iconsideration. iIn ireviewing ithe itheory iof iTL,

i Beauchamp iand iMorton i(2011) iconducted ia istudy ito iexamine iwhether iphysical-education

i teachers’ itransformational ileadership iteaching ibehavior iaffected ithe istudents’ ibehaviors, itheir

i personal iphysical iactivity ibehavior, iand itheir ileisure itime iphysical iactivities ibehaviors. iThe istudy

i was iconducted iat ia ischool ilocated iin iBritish iColumbia, iCanada. iThe iparticipants iwere i2,948

i adolescents iin isecondary ischool ilevel. i

The iresearchers iexamined ithe iextent ito iwhich ithe iteacher’s itransformational iteachings

i about iphysical iactivities iin ithe iclassroom iaffected ithe iadolescents’ iattitudes itoward iphysical

i activities iand iwhether ithe iteachers’ itransformational ileadership ibehaviors icontributed ito ia ichange

i in ithe iadolescents’ iphysical iactivity iresponses. iThe iresearchers iused ithe iMultilevel iStructural

i Equation iModeling i(MSEM) ias ia iprospective iobservational itool. iMSEM iis ia icluster isampling

i method iused ionly iif ithe itarget ipopulation ihas ian ihierarchical istructure, isuch ias ieducational

i departments, iand iwhen ithe itarget ipopulation i(students) iis ilocated iwithin ispecific ischools i(Joreskog

i & iSorbom, i2006). i

 The istudents irated itheir iphysical ieducation iteachers’ ibehaviors iduring ithe ihalfway ipoint iof

i the ischool iyear iand icompleted imeasures iof itheir ieffective iattitudes itwo imonths ilater. iBeauchamp,

i Barling, iand iMorton i(2011) iindicated ithat ithe ifindings ithe istudy isuggested ithat ithe iteachers’

i transformational ileadership ibehaviors, isuch ias iinspirational iand iactive iclassroom iengagement iwith

i students iduring iclassroom iinstructions, imotivated ithe istudents ito ichange ibehaviors. iThe ifindings

i also isuggested ithat ithe iteachers imotivated ithe istudents ito ienjoy iphysical ieducation ias iwell ias

i health-enhancing iphysical iactivity iinvolvement iwithin iand ioutside iof ischool iby ithe iengagement iof

i fitness iexercises. iThe istudy iindicated ithat ithe itransformational ileadership iused iby ithe iteachers

i during iclassroom iinstructions icould ichange ibehaviors, iincrease istudent imotivation iand iself-

efficacy, iand imove ithem ito icontinue itheir iphysical iactivities i(Beauchamp iet ial., i2011). iThe istudy

i revealed ithat iteachers, ias ileaders iin ithe iclassroom, icould iinfluence itheir istudents’ ibehavior ito

i mirror ior ito iexceed itheir iexpectations i(Bass i& iRiggio, i2006; iGardner, i1990). i

2.1.3 Chapter iSummary i

This ichapter iprovides ithe ireader iwith ian iunderstanding iof ithe iempirical iresearch iby inoted

i scholars ithat ispeaks ito ileadership iand iadolescence iand ithe itheoretical iframework ithat ialign ithe

i connectedness ibetween ithe itheory iand ipractice ito isupport itheir iperspectives. iIn iaddition, ithe

i review iof iliterature ioutlined ithe iimportance iof ideveloping ithe ileadership iskills iof isecondary ischool

i students ifrom ithe iperspective iof iadministration, iteachers, iand istudents iwithin ithe isecondary ischool

i system. i

The ireview iof ithe iliterature ipertaining ito ithe iresearch istudies iof ischool iadministrators iwho

i foster ileadership iskills idevelopment iof istudents iin ia ischool isetting iwere ioutlined ito iinform ithe

i study’s ifocus i(Lavery i& iHine, i2012; iSacks, i2009). iThe iliterature ion ithe itwo itheoretical

i frameworks ithat iguide ithis istudy, isocial iidentity itheory i(Tajfel i& iTurner, i1971) iand
i transformational ileadership itheory i(Bass, i1985; iBurns, i1978; iDownton, i1973), iaddressed

i adolescent igroup, ipeer iaffiliation iand iconformity, iand ioutlined ithe irole ithat iteachers iplay iin

i transforming istudents iin ithe iclassroom isetting, irespectively i(Beauchamp iet ial.). i

However, ithe iliterature ireview idemonstrated ia igap iin ileadership iskills idevelopment iof

i secondary ischool istudents iin ithe iclassroom isetting. iIt iis ithe igoal iof ithis istudy ito inote ithe

i importance iof ileadership iskills idevelopment iin isecondary ischools ito ispringboard iyoung ileaders ifor

i the i21st icentury iglobal iworkforce.

 CHAPTER i3 i

3 RESEARCH DESIGN METHODOLOGY

i i

3.1 Introduction i

This iquantitative istudy iexamined ithe iimportance iof ileadership idevelopment iof isecondary

i school istudents iin i ithe iperspective iof iteachers, istudents, iand iadministrators. iResearcher iwrote ithat

i leadership ienhancement iin ia ischool ienvironment idirectly iaffects istudent iachievement iscores. iHe

i stated ithat iit iis iimportant ito idevelop ileadership iskills iin iadolescents ibecause iit iis ia iprerequisite ito

i higher iacademic iperformance. i

Day iand iAntonakis i(2012) iwrote ithat iwhen ileadership iskills iare ideveloped iin istudents, itheir

i test iscores iincrease, imaladaptive ibehaviors idecrease, iand iabsenteeism idecreases, ithus iimproving

i the idropout irate. iHowever, iseveral iproblems icontinue ito iimpede ithe ileadership iskills idevelopment

i of isecondary ischool istudents. iThese iproblems iare ithe ilack iof ileadership iskills idevelopment iin

i classroom iinstructions, idue ito ithe imandate iof icommon icore istandards ito iincrease iacademic

i growth. iThis imandate iforces iteachers ito iprompt istudents ito iimprove itheir itest iscores iof ithe

i common icore irequired isubjects, iproviding ino iroom ifor ileadership idevelopment igrowth, iwhich iis

i due ito ithe iemphasis iin iinstruction ion itest-taking istrategies i(CCSS, i2013).

With ithe iPakistan iState iAzad iKashmir idemand ifor iteachers ito iimprove istudents’ iacademic

i performance, iSternberg i(2005) iwrote ithat ileadership idevelopment iof isecondary ischool istudents

i should ibe ia ipriority iin iclassroom iinstructions. iHowever, ithe imajority iof ithe ipriorities irest iwith ithe

i State iStandards, iwhich ihave ilimited ithe ifocus ion ileadership idevelopment. iFurther, ithe

i ambivalence iof iteachers ito iassign ileadership itasks ito inon-gifted istudents iimpedes ithe istudents’

i leadership igrowth iprocess. iAccording ito iManning i(2005) iand iMarland i(1972), ionly igifted istudents

i are iseen ias ipotential ileaders iand ishould ibe igiven iall iaccommodations ito idevelop itheir ileadership
i skills. iHowever, ithis iexclusion ipolicy ineed ito ibe ireviewed ito iinclude inon-gifted istudents iwho ido

i not ihave ithe irequired iIQ ito iqualify ibut iwho ihave ithe ipotential ifor ileadership iskills idevelopment,

i which ican ilead ito iimproving itheir iacademic igrowth i(Goodman i& iRogers, i2001). iThis iinclusion ito

i develop ithe ileadership ipotential iof iall istudents imay ibuild irenewed iconfidence ito ithe ihigh

i percentage iof isecondary ischool istudents iwho ichoose ito ifollow iinstead iof ilead i(Riggio, i2009;

i vanLinden i& iFertman, i1998). i

The isocial idevelopment igrowth iof imany isecondary ischool istudents iis ifortified ithrough ipeer

i group ileadership ias iadolescents iseek ito idiscover, idefine, iand iidentify ithemselves ithrough ithe igroup

i process i(Tajfel i& iTurner, i1974). iAccording iTajfel iand iTurner, imany iadolescents iduring ithis igroup

i process ichoose ito ibecome ifollowers, iadapting ithe isocial, iintellectual, iand iemotional ibehaviors iof

i their igroup ileaders iand iconforming ito ithe isocial iidentity iof ithe igroup. iThey igo ion ito isay ithat ithe

i adolescents’ icompliance ito ithe igroup ileaders’ idirectives iimpede itheir ileadership igrowth iprocess. iIt

i is ithe ihope ithat iaddressing ithe ihindrance iof ithe ileadership idevelopment iof isecondary ischool

i students iduring itheir isocial idevelopment istage iwill ibecome ia iphenomenon iof ileadership

i development igrowth iof iall isecondary ischool istudents iglobally i(Tajfel i& iTurner, i1974). i

A iquantitative iphenomenological idesign iwas iused ifor ithis istudy. iResearcher istudy

i emphasizes ithe iindividual’s iexperiences ion ia igiven itopic i(Creswell, i2007). iAccording ito iCreswell,

i a iphenomenological istudy iallows ithe iindividuals ito ishare itheir ilived iexperiences ithrough

i interviews iand ifocus igroups. iThis iphenomenological istudy, ithe iperspective iof iadministrators,

i teachers, iand istudents iarticulated itheir ilived iexperiences ipertaining ito ithe iimportance iof

i developing ithe ileadership iskills iof isecondary ischool istudents iin igrades i9 ithrough i10 i(Creswell,

i 2005; iPatton i2001). i

 Creswell i(2005) iindicated ithat iin iorder ito imaximize ithe idata, ibroad, iopen-ended, igeneral

i questions iare iapplicable. iInterviews iand ifocus igroups iprovided ifull iinvestigation iof ithe isubject ias

i it iincluded ifollow-up iquestions ithat iallowed ithe iparticipants ito iexpand ion itheir ishared iexperiences.

i Qualitative iresearch iguided ithe iresearcher ito ianswer iquestions ithat irequired iclarification,

i justification, iand ifurther iknowledge iabout ithe igiven itopic ibeing iexplored i(Cottrell i& iMcKenzie,

i 2011). iThe ifollowing iresearch iquestions istudy: i

1. The leadership skill is the special skill for secondary level students.
i i i i i i i i i i i

2. There is a positive role of leadership skills at secondary level students.

i i i i i i i i i i i

3.1.1 Research iContext i

This istudy itook iplace iin iBrooklyn, iPakistan iState iof iAzad iKashmir iin ia isecondary ischool

i located iin iKotli icommunity. iOver i30 iteachers iare iassigned ito ithis ischool, iwhich iis iwhere ithe idata

i was icollected. iSome iof ithe iteachers iteach isecondary ischool ilevel istudents, iwhile iothers iteach iESL

i and ispecial ieducation istudents. iThe ifirst ifloor ihouses ifive iregular iclassrooms, ia icomputer ilab

i room, ia ilarge iauditorium, ia iparents’ iroom, ia iconference iroom, ia iteachers’ iroom, itwo inurse/medical

i suites, itwo iESL irooms, ithe iprincipal’s ioffice, ian iacademic iintervention iservices iroom, ithree imusic

i rooms, ifive ischool-based isupport iteam irooms, iand ifour iDepartment iof iEducation iorganization

i rooms. iThe isecond ifloor ihouses ifive iregular iclassrooms, i10 iclassrooms ifor igrades i6-8 iand ithe

i special ieducation istudents, ia iscience ilab, ia iteachers’ iroom, ia ilibrary, ifour ispecial-education

i classrooms, ithe iassistant iprincipal’s ioffice, iand ia iguidance icounselor’s ioffice. iThe ithird ifloors

i house ia igymnasium, icomputer ilab, iand igrade i6-8 iclassrooms, ia iresource iroom, iguidance ioffice, ia

i dean’s ioffice, ispecial-education iclassrooms, iand istaff idevelopment irooms. iThe ifourth ifloor ihouses

i the imedia icenter, ia igymnasium, iand iprivate ispace. iThe ibasement ihouses ia iteachers’ icafeteria iand

i general ibuilding isupport irooms. i

 The icurrent ischool ipopulation icomprises imainly iCaribbean iimmigrants iwith ithe ilargest

i percent iof iHaitian-American idecent. iThe icurrent ischool ipopulation iis i98% iminority, iwith i60% iof

i the ichildren icoming ifrom isingle-parent ihouseholds iwith ilow isocio-economic istatus. iThe ischool

i serves i636 istudents, iwith i150 iare iEnglish-language ilearners, iand i200 iare ibilingual. iMany iof ithe

i students iare iimmigrants ifrom iAfrica, ithe iDominican iRepublic, iHaiti, ivarious iSecondary iEastern

i countries, iand iSouth iAmerica. i

According ito ithe i2017-19 ienrollment idata ifrom ithe iPakistan iState iof iAzad iKashmir iState

i Education iDepartment’s iStudent iInformation iRepository iSystem i(SIRS), ithe igeneral istudent

i population icomprised i52% imale iand i48% ifemale. iIn iaddition, ione-third iof ithe istudent ipopulation

i (202 istudents) ihas ibeen iretained iat ileast ionce iin ia igrade. iCurrently, ithere iare i176 istudents iclassified

i as ispecial-education istudents. iLast, ithe iattendance irate ifor ithe ischool iyear i2017-18 iwas i92%. i

3.1.2 Research iParticipants i

The iparticipants ifor ithe istudy iwere isecondary ischool iteachers iof isecondary, isecondary

i school ilevel istudents, iwhich iwere icomprised iof imale iand ifemale istudents, iand ithe isecondary

i school iadministrators. iTen iEnglish iLanguage iArts i(ELA) iand iMath iteachers ivolunteered ito

i participate iin ithe ifocus igroup. iIn iorder ito istreamline ithe isample ipool, ionly ithe iELA iand iMath

i teachers iwere iasked ito iparticipate iin ithe ifocus igroup. iSince ithe istandardized itests iin iPakistan iState

i of iAzad iKashmir iState iinclude iELA iand iMath, iselection ifrom ithis igroup iof iteachers, irather ithan

i from iall iof ithe icore isubject iareas, iwas ialigned iwith ithe istudy. i

Twenty-two istudents ivolunteered ito iparticipate iin ithe iresearch istudy. iThree iclassrooms,

i each, iwere irandomly iselected ifrom ithe isecondary ilevel iclasses. iThe itotal istudent ipopulation iin ithe

i three irandomly iselected isecondary ischool ilevel iclasses iwere i75-80 istudents. iDetails iof ithis iprocess

i are ifurther iexplained iin ithe idata icollection isection iof ithis ichapter. iIn iaddition ito iteachers iand
 i student ifocus igroup iparticipants, ithe iadministrator iand/assistant iprincipal iwere iparticipants iin ithe

i interview iprocess. i

3.1.3 Procedures ifor iData iCollection iand iAnalysis i

A ibackground icheck iof ithe iresearcher iwas ion ifile iat ithe iDOE isite. iIn iaddition, ithe iprincipal

i granted iapproval ifor ithe iresearcher ito iconduct ithe istudy iat ithe ischool isite. iThe iresearcher ibegan ithe

i research istudy iin ithe ilatter ipart iof iJanuary i2015 iby imeeting iwith ithe iprincipal. iThe iresearcher imet

i with ithe iprincipal iand irequested ihis ipermission ito ifacilitate ithe ifollowing: i

1. iBegin ithe irecruitment iprocess ifor idata icollection iby iproviding isecondary ischool ilevel iclass ilists

i to ithe iresearcher iand ito ifacilitate ia imeeting iwith ithe iteachers. i

2. iProvide itime ifor iELA iand imath iteachers ito icomplete ia iLeadership iScale ifor istudent iselection iat

i the iteacher imeeting. i

3. iBegin ithe irecruitment iprocess ifor istudents iby iallowing ithe iresearcher ito ibriefly ispeak ito ieach

i ELA iand iMath iclass ito iinform ithe istudents iabout ithe istudy i(after ithe iteacher imeeting). i

4. iHave ia istaff imember iavailable ioutside iof ithe iroom iwhere ithe istudent ifocus igroups iwill itake iplace

i in ithe ievent iany istudent ichose ito ileave ibefore ithe iend iof ithe ifocus igroup isession. i

According ito iKamberelis iand iDimitriadis i(2017), ifocus igroups iprovide iseveral

i perspectives ion ia igiven itopic, ienriching ithe idialogue. iSince ithe iresearcher iwas iinterested iin ithe

i point iof iview ifrom ithe iperspective iof iadministrators, iteachers, iand istudents iregarding ileadership

i skills idevelopment iof istudents, ithe ifocus igroup isessions iprovided iresults ifrom ithree iperspectives

i of ithe iconstituent igroups i(Kitzinger, i1994). i

3.1.4 Student iparticipants

As istated iearlier, ithe iresearcher ibegan ithe iprocess iof istudent iselection iby ifirst, irandomly

i selecting ithe ithree iclasses i(ELA iand imath) ifrom isecondary ilevel ischool iclass ilists iprovided iby ithe
i administrator. iThe iresearcher imet iwith ithe istudents iin ithe isecondary ilevel ischool iclasses iwithin ithe

i week iand iprovided iinformation iabout ithe istudy, iread iand iexplained ithe iassent iform icontent,

i explained ithe iparent iconsent iform icontent, isolicited iquestions ifor iclarification, iand iexplained ithat

i participation iwas ivoluntary iand ithey icould iwithdraw ifrom ithe ifocus igroup iat iany itime. iAssent

i forms iwere igiven ito istudents iwho ivolunteered ito iparticipate iin ithe ifocus igroup isessions. iThe

i students iwere ialso igiven ithe iparent iconsent iform ito ideliver ito iparents iand ireturn ias ia isigned

i document ito ithe iteacher. iThe iresearcher iarranged ito ipick iup ithe iforms ifrom ian iassigned iteacher

i during ifree itime. iAfter ithe istudent iparticipants’ isigned iparent iconsent iforms iwere ireceived iby ithe

i researcher, ithe iresearcher ibegan ithe iprocess iof istudent iplacement iin iFocus iGroup i1 ior iFocus

i Group i2. iWhile ithe istudent inames iappeared ion ithe iinitial iform ithat ithe iteachers icompleted, ias iwell

i as ithe iforms iparents iand istudents icompleted, icodes iwere iassigned, iand ino inames iappeared ion iany

i documents iin ithe istudy. iIn iaddition, iall istudent iinformation iobtained ifrom ithe ifocus igroups iwill ibe

i destroyed ithree iyears iafter ithe istudy icompletion idate. i

The iresearcher iand ithe iprincipal iagreed ithat ithe iresearcher iwould iconduct ithe istudent ifocus

i group isession iwithin ia itimeframe iof ithe ilast iweek iin iFebruary iand ithe ifirst itwo iweeks iin iMarch. iIt

i was iagreed ithat istudent iinstructional itime icould inot ibe icompromised ias ia iresult iof itheir

i participation iin ithe ifocus igroup isession. iThe istudent ifocus igroups ilasted i20-30 iminutes iin ilength. i