Introduction
Headteachers’ leadership skills are of extreme importance for the efficient cooperation of teaching staff. At the same time, problem-solving skills are also vital since they help to decrease the amount of stress put in headteachers. The present paper offers a review of an article by Izgar (2008) with the title Headteachers’ Leadership Behavior and Problem-Solving Skills: A Comparative Study, which utilizes a quantitative approach to study the correlation between problem-solving skills and leadership behavior of headteachers. The research uses independent t-tests, one-way ANOVA analysis, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient to answer five research questions. Even though the organization of the paper has some flaws, its results are reliable due to the adequate use of research methods.
Research Problem
Even though the research questions are stated clearly, there is no information about the research problem Izgar (2008) is trying to address. The purpose of the research was to investigate if there is a significant correlation between headteachers’ leadership behavior and problem-solving skills. Moreover, the article explores if leadership behavior and problem-solving skills depend on gender and the type of school.
However, the study does not include a section dedicated to the research problem, and it is not stated, even indirectly. Implicitly, it may be understood that the problem Izgar (2008) is trying to solve is the absence of knowledge concerning correlations between problem-solving skills and leadership behavior in headteachers. Moreover, since there is no problem statement, it is difficult to determine if the problem is significant, important, or relevant.
It is unclear how the study adds to the present body of knowledge since the background of the problem is not discussed. Even though the variables are clearly defined, and the relationship of interest between them is described in the introduction, there is little information concerning the dimensions of the constructs. As mentioned by Baarda (2010), the formulation of the research problem is vital since it provides guidance for future study (p. 12). In summary, it can be stated that the absence of a research problem statement is one of the definite flaws of the article.
Review of Literature
While the literature review is adequate, it is scattered through the article, which makes it difficult to appreciate the current body of knowledge. Similar to the problem statement, Izgar (2008) does not have a separate section for the literature review, though a brief overview of current knowledge is provided in the introduction and discussion. The literature review is extensive, as it touches upon more than 60 recent and outdated articles. Even though the majority of reviewed literature was outdated at the time the article was published, it cannot be considered a flaw since the majority of recent studies concerning the subject were mentioned.
Even though Izgar (2008) related the studies directly to the problem, the literature is not critically appraised, and the review is not logically organized. While the article mentioned behavioral theories, the theoretical framework for the significance of the study is not established. The central issue with the literature review is its failure to acknowledge the gap in current knowledge, which makes it difficult to understand if the article makes any contributions to the literature on the subject. Therefore, several improvements can be made to the literature review provided in the study.
Selection of Participants
One of the study’s significant strengths is sample characteristics as they support the generalizability of the results. The population is primary and high school headteachers working in five Turkish cities in the 2004-2005 academic year. The sample size is 268 participants, among which 215 are male, and 53 are female. Even though the procedure of participant selection is not described, Izgar (2008) stated the participants were randomly selected, which helped the study to avoid bias. The sample size seems reasonably large to receive unbiased results; however, the minimal sample size is difficult to calculate due to the absence of needed data.
While the size and major characteristics of the population studied is not described, the sample characteristics are carefully outlined. The only considerable flaw of the sample selection procedure is the absence of assurance that the rights of human participants were protected, which is crucial, according to Baarda (2010). Therefore, the section can be improved by including ethical considerations and privacy information.
Instrumentation
Instrumentation is another strong side of the article under analysis. Izgar (2008) utilized three tools, including the Personal Information Form, the Leadership Behavior Scale, and the Problem Solving Inventory. All the inventories, except for the Personal Information Form, were borrowed, and their validity and reliability were stated using appropriate scales. Izgar (2008) provides evidence that the utilized tools are suitable for the study and the population under analysis. All the instruments are described adequately, and the only thing that can be improved is describing the validation process of the Personal Information Form. However, considering that it only includes gender and school name, validation may be not needed.
Design and Procedure
The design of the study seems to be appropriate for answering the research question. Independent sample t-tests are adequate for identifying if there is a statistically significant difference in problem-solving skills and leadership behavior between men and women. Pearson’s R is applicable for determining the correlation between two independent variables, and ANOVA is useful for examining if leadership behaviors and problem-solving skills differ depending on the type of school. The data gathering and analysis procedure, however, is not described, which implies that the study is difficult to replicate. The control procedures and potentially confounding variables are not addressed, which can lead to a certain degree of bias. Therefore, the study can be improved by adding information about the procedures.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
As mentioned above, the study aims at answering five research questions, which are explicitly stated. While Izgar (2008) defined three central questions, there were also two sub-questions, which are discussed in the present paper as separate research questions for the sake of structural integrity of the review. Before discussing each question individually, it is worth mentioning several matters that are true for every research question. First, Izgar (2008) does not describe the results of statistical tests of significance appropriately given the hypotheses and design of the study. Second, there is no evidence that the researcher avoided violating the required assumptions for parametric tests used in the study. Finally, Izgar (2008) does not explain why the mentioned significance levels were used in the study.
Question 1
Research Question 1 (RQ1). “Do headteachers’ leadership behaviors differ depending on gender?” (Izgar, 2008, p. 537)
H10: There is no difference in leadership behavior between the male and female populations.
H1A: There is a difference in leadership behavior between male and female population
The researchers identified ten leadership behaviors and conducted ten two-sample t-tests to compare if the difference in the use of the styles is statistically significant. The number of tests is equal to the number of identified leadership behaviors. The results are demonstrated in a table with appropriate descriptive statistics and t-scores. However, no p-values were introduced, significance levels were not discussed, and the assumptions were not tested.
After converting t-score into p-values using degrees of freedom equal to 52, the differences were found statistically insignificant at all commonly used significance levels (0.1, 0.05, and 0.01). The degrees of freedom were calculated by subtracting 1 from the smallest sample. Since the sample of females is 53, the degrees of freedom are 52. The results of the conversion of t-score into p-values in Microsoft Excel using TDIST function are demonstrated in Table 1 below. Since p-values are greater than all possible significance levels, the null hypothesis was not rejected.
Table 1. RQ1a Results. Adapted from ‘Headteachers’ leadership behavior and problem-solving skills: A comparative study,’ by Izgar, H., Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36(4), p. 538. Copyright by Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal.
Question 2
Research Question 2 (RQ2). “Do headteachers’ problem-solving skills differ depending on gender?” (Izgar, 2008, p. 537)
H20: There is difference in problem-solving skills between the male and female populations.
H2A: There is a difference in problem-solving skills between male and female population
Izgar (2008) identifies six approaches to problem-solving and, therefore, uses six independent sample t-tests to test the hypothesis. The researcher also presented the results in a chart with appropriate descriptive statistics and t-scores, which were also converted to p-values. In order to acquire a deeper understanding of the research results, the t-scores were converted in p-values using 52 for the number of degrees of freedom. The rationale for using 52 degrees of freedom is described in the previous section. The researcher did not state the significance level before presenting the results. However, after converting the t-scores to p-values, it became evident that the significance level does not matter since the p-values of tests are significantly higher than all commonly used significance level (0.01, 0.05, 0.1). The specific results are demonstrated in Table 3 below.
Table 2. RQ1a Results. Adapted from ‘Headteachers’ leadership behavior and problem-solving skills: A comparative study,’ by Izgar, H., Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36(4), p. 539. Copyright by Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal.
Further Considerations
The key results of two-sample t-tests are that there are no differences in problem-solving skills and leadership behaviors between female and male populations. The hypothesis testing procedure of independent t-tests was poorly described, and numerous matters are not mentioned. For instance, the effect sizes and degrees of freedom and possible effects of uncontrolled variables are not discussed. An insufficient description of methods made the results difficult to reproduce. However, the presented results were sufficient to answer all research questions for several reasons. First, even though the hypotheses were not stated explicitly, all of them were tested.
Second, all the results were clearly presented in well-organized tables and figures supporting the comprehension of the material. Third, all the findings were compared to the results of previous studies, which helped to understand the gap in literature the research was trying to address. Finally, each result was extensively discussed in terms of the original hypothesis to which it related. Therefore, all the acquired results seem reliable, and the absence of a clear description of the testing procedures may be explained by the desire not to overload the reader with information.
Conclusion
In summary, the research is an ambitious research process that examines multiple variables and relationships between them. However, the researcher answered all the research questions. All generalizations are consistent with the results, implications for practice are discussed, and recommendations for further research are outlined. At the same time, the assumptions and limitations of the study are not clearly stated, which is a significant omission. As the author failed to identify the gap in the literature which the study tried to address, it is challenging to understand what contribution the article offers. Therefore, the article passes the “so what” test with difficulties. The present review demonstrates that correctly chosen and executed methodologies cannot guarantee a high quality of research. In the future, I will consider this fact and put more effort into describing the research problem and review of the literature.
References
Baarda, B. (2010). Research: This is it! Groningen, The Netherlands: Noordhoff.
Izgar, H. (2008). Headteachers’ leadership behavior and problem-solving skills: A comparative study. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36(4), 535-548.