Quality Assurance in Education

Quality teaching through transformational classroom leadership

James Pounder
Article information:
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

To cite this document:

James Pounder , (2014),"Quality teaching through transformational classroom leadership", Quality
Assurance in Education, Vol. 22 Iss 3 pp. 273 - 285
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/QAE-12-2013-0048
Downloaded on: 30 September 2015, At: 00:11 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 67 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 754 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Maria Eliophotou Menon, (2014),"The relationship between transformational leadership, perceived leader
effectiveness and teachers’ job satisfaction", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 52 Iss 4 pp.
509-528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2013-0014
Yingxiu Yang, (2014),"Principals’ transformational leadership in school improvement", International Journal
of Educational Management, Vol. 28 Iss 3 pp. 279-288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-04-2013-0063
Claire Hennessy, Gill Adams, Elizabeth Mahon, Sarah Nixon, Andrea Pratt, Louise Williams,
(2014),"Discovering inspiring teaching: immersive models of staff development", Quality Assurance in
Education, Vol. 22 Iss 3 pp. 240-254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/QAE-01-2013-0006

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:543713 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm

Quality teaching through Quality teaching

through
transformational classroom transformational
classroom
leadership
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

James Pounder 273

Teaching and Learning Centre, Lingnan University, Hong Kong
Received 5 December 2013
Revised 5 April 2014
Accepted 12 May 2014
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to indicate that transformational classroom leadership has
substantial benefits in terms of enhancing the quality of the classroom experience and associated
educational outcome in the context of growing criticism of university teaching quality. It also aims to
recommend the focus of future research to realise these benefits.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper comprises a comprehensive review of literature on the
outcomes of transformational leadership in a classroom context and identifies weaknesses in the
research thus far. It then indicates an approach to capitalising the potential of this instructional
innovation.
Findings – Transformational classroom leadership has substantial benefits in terms of enhancing the
quality of the classroom experience for both students and teachers.
Research limitations/implications – This paper produces substantial arguments in favour of
transformational classroom leadership as a means of enhancing teaching quality and educational
outcomes. Nevertheless, the paper also recognises that research, thus far, has yet to indicate a
systematic way forward to affecting its implementation.
Practical implications – The transformational classroom leadership approach advocated in this
paper has practical benefits for both students and teachers, especially at the university level.
Originality/value – This paper draws attention to the potential benefits of transformational
classroom leadership as a means of enhancing the quality of the classroom experience particularly for
students. It also indicates a way forward designed to realise the benefits of this instructional approach.
Keywords Transformational leadership, Effort, Engagement, Performance, Classroom, Teaching
quality
Paper type Literature review

Introduction
The last decade saw the introduction of the notion of transformational classroom
leadership. This notion grew out of the strong assertions made in leadership literature
regarding the benefits of transformational leadership in a traditional organisational
setting. For example, a number of studies have suggested that transformational
leadership has a positive influence on subordinates’ effort and satisfaction (Bycio et al.,
1995; Kirkpatrick and Locke, 1996; Parry, 2000), on their cooperation and compliance
(Den Hartog et al., 2007) and on their performance (Howell and Frost, 1989), particularly
in a group or team situation (Avolio et al., 1988; Barling et al., 1996; Den Hartog et al.,
1997; Neumann, 1992). Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 22 No. 3, 2014
Some of these studies have prima-facie relevance to education; for instance, the pp. 273-285
research of Slater and Narver (1995), Farrel (2000) and Coad and Berry (1998) indicate a © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
link between transformational leadership and enhanced subordinate learning. This link DOI 10.1108/QAE-12-2013-0048
 QAE is especially important given increasing criticism of the quality of teaching provided by
educational establishments, particularly in the university sector. For example, the
22,3 recent Arum and Roksa (2011) report found that a large proportion of students in the US
higher education system made very small or near non-existent gains in critical thinking,
complex reasoning and written communication skills as a result of their four-year
university experience. Similarly, the following observation taken from The Guardian
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

274 Higher Education Network is typical of a general concern with university teaching
quality in the British universities:
A revolution in teaching is needed to meet the needs of people relying on a university education
to help secure their future. More innovative approaches to teaching across the whole range of
subjects are important in delivering employability (Tatlow, 2012).
Likewise, referring to the Australian higher education system, a report by the Grattan
Institute (Norton et al., 2013) found that Australian students “rarely reported being
pushed to do their best work, are often not actively participating in classes, and have
little interaction with academic staff outside of class” (Norton et al., 2013, p. 1). Henard
and Roseveare (2012), in a recent publication commissioned by the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development that examined the quality of university
teaching generally in higher education, stated the following:
Quality teaching in higher education matters for student learning outcomes. But fostering
quality teaching presents higher education institutions with a range of challenges at a time
when the higher education sector is coming under pressure from many different directions.
Institutions need to ensure that the education they offer meets the expectations of students and
the requirements of employers, both today and for the future. (p. 3)
Aside from confirming the current spotlight on teaching, the authors note that there is
no easy solution to the issue of enhancing university teaching, and it is against this
background that developments in transformational classroom leadership should be
viewed. It is argued, in this paper, that transformational leadership in the classroom is
one possible way forward for universities and colleges under pressure to improve the
quality of teaching.
Given the above, it is fortuitous that scholars in recent years have begun to
investigate the effects of the transformational leadership style in the classroom. Most
studies focus on face-to-face classroom instruction at the university level, although there
are a few studies that have examined the effects of this style in an online environment
and at the school level. Whether at university, online or school level, there is now a
growing body of research that confirms the potential of transformational leadership in
a classroom setting. The aim of this paper is to take stock of this research and suggest
what is needed to move forward from this point.

Classrooms as organisations
The argument on the applicability of transformational leadership to a classroom setting
rests on the premise that classrooms can be treated as quasi-organisations, and this
premise is now largely accepted in research on the effects of teacher leadership
characteristics on students (Bolkan and Goodboy, 2009, 2011; Cheng, 1994; Harrison,
2011; Luechauer and Shulman, 2002; Ruddell, 2008; Strong-Rhoads, 2011; Tsai and Lin,
2012; Weaver and Qi, 2005). Balwant (2013) is one of the few critics of this premise,
generally on the basis that students are not subordinates in the true sense of the word
 but more akin to paying clients. However, his view, if accepted, merely reinforces the Quality teaching
importance of transformational classroom leadership characteristics as the major
factors influencing students rather than influence through the rewards and
through
punishments typically available to the conventional “boss”. Isolated criticisms aside, transformational
some scholars have gone beyond mere acceptance of the feasibility of conceiving of classroom
classrooms as organisations and have specifically advocated that classrooms be used to
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

model the issues commonly experienced in conventional organisations (Brewer and 275
Burgess, 2005; Lyons, 1995). Others have argued that teachers should adapt business
management models to the classroom (Sze and Kester-Phillips, 2008) and that effective
classroom management is a crucial factor governing student learning (Wang et al.,
1993/1994). In summary, conceiving classrooms as quasi-organisations is not only
largely accepted but is actually advocated by some scholars in the area.

Development and benefits of the transformational classroom leadership

concept
The central research on transformational classroom leadership has generally taken the
transformational leadership model originally developed by Bass (1985) as a basis for
studying the application of the concept in a classroom context. This model embodies
transformational leadership characteristics that are measured by the full or short
version of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). Perusal of the various
studies of transformational classroom leadership indicates that there is a consistency of
results, irrespective of whether the full or long version of the MLQ is involved. The
transformational leadership characteristics in the Bass (1985) model are as follows:
• Idealised influence or charisma: Leaders provide vision and a sense of mission.
They extol the virtues of the vision and display total commitment to it. Leaders
emphasise trust; they take a stand on difficult issues, present their own most
central values and point out the ethical consequences of decisions. They are
admired as role models and generate pride, loyalty and confidence not least
because they are able to consider followers’ needs over their own. Such leaders
create an alignment around a shared purpose.
• Inspirational motivation: Leaders exhibiting this trait act as models for
subordinates, communicate a vision in an appealing way and use symbols to focus
efforts. They communicate high performance expectations to followers, talk
optimistically and with enthusiasm and provide encouragement and meaning for
what has to be done. Such leaders encourage subordinates to envision, and take
ownership of, attractive future states.
• Individual consideration: Leaders coach and mentor, provide continuous feedback
and links organisational members’ needs to the organisation’s mission. They
consider their subordinates’ individual needs, abilities and aspirations. They are
advisors, coaches and mentors. Followers are developed to higher levels of
potential through the provision of new learning opportunities. Individual
differences in terms of needs and desires are addressed.
• Intellectual stimulation: Leaders stimulate followers to rethink old ways of doing
things and to reassess their old values and beliefs. New ideas and creative
solutions are solicited and there is a tolerance for mistakes that may occur in the
search for creativity (Bass, 1985; Bass and Avolio, 1989, 1994, 2000).
 QAE Ojode et al. (1999) conducted a landmark study in which they investigated the effects of
full-range leadership (Bass and Avolio, 1997) (i.e. a notion that includes, in additional to
22,3 transformational leadership, the more traditional transactional leadership) in the
university classroom and employed a version of the MLQ slightly modified for a
classroom setting, e.g. replacing the term leader with instructor and the term group with
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

class. In addition to assessing the extent to which subordinates perceive their leaders to
276 be transformational, i.e. they display the above characteristics, the MLQ measures the
characteristics of transactional leadership, a notion mentioned earlier, and three
outcome variables:
(1) subordinates’ willingness to put in extra effort;
(2) perception of leadership effectiveness; and
(3) satisfaction with the leader.

Using a small sample of graduate students (57) in a US university, Ojode and colleagues
found that the transformational leadership dimensions were positively and significantly
correlated with the outcome variables in the MLQ. In the classroom context, these
variables were student willingness to put in extra effort, classroom leadership
effectiveness and student satisfaction with classroom leadership.
Walumbwa and Ojode (2000) conducted a follow-up investigation, again in a US
university context, using a larger sample (429) including graduate and undergraduate
students. While the major focus of this study was to examine the effect of student gender
on perceptions of transformational – transactional leadership, the study also supported
the results of their 1999 study. The findings of the above studies were further confirmed
by Pounder (2008) in an analysis of the applicability of transformational classroom
leadership to a Hong Kong university business school using a sample of 475 senior
undergraduate students and again employing the MLQ modified for a university
classroom setting. His study indicated that instructors perceived to be transformational
classroom leaders positively influenced student self-reported extra effort, perception of
instructor effectiveness and satisfaction with their teachers. The results of confirmatory
factor analysis and alpha scores also indicated that the classroom leadership instrument
developed in the study retained the integrity of the original transformational leadership
model and was capable of valid and reliable measurement.
The implication of the confirmatory factor analysis referred to above is that the
benefits claimed for the original transformational leadership conceptualisation are
potentially also available in a classroom environment due to the conceptual consistency
of the classroom version of transformational leadership developed by Pounder (2008)
and the original version (Bass, 1985). This implication is reinforced by a growing
recognition, noted above, that the university classroom is actually a small social
organisation where organisational concepts are at home. Pounder (2008) also pointed to
the possibility that the benefits of applying transformational leadership in the
classroom may be available across cultures.
Bolkan and Goodboy (2009) extended the research by examining the effect of
transformational classroom leadership on university student outcomes associated with
effective teaching behaviour (Goodboy and Myers, 2008) that had not been specified in
previous research. These outcomes are cognitive learning (knowledge and skill
acquisition), affective learning (attitude to the educational process, e.g. the subject
 matter, teacher, etc.), state motivation (desire to obtain academic knowledge or skill Quality teaching
based on finding classroom activities worthwhile) and communication satisfaction
(extent of acceptability of the communication experience). Additionally, the authors
through
measured the effects of transformational classroom leadership on the extent of student transformational
participation and perception of teacher credibility on the grounds that both have been classroom
associated with positive student outcomes including achievement and learning (Bolkan
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

and Goodboy, 2009). Again employing a version of the MLQ adapted for classroom use, 277
and also confirming the validity and reliability of the classroom version of
transformational leadership instrument via confirmatory factor analysis and
Cronbach’s alpha, the Bolkan and Goodboy (2009) study revealed moderate-to-strong
positive relationships between components of transformational classroom leadership
and the student outcomes referred to above. Similarly, in a university level study
specifically focusing on student engagement and satisfaction, Tsai and Lin (2012)
employed an instrument based on the MLQ and found that classroom transformational
leadership behaviours were positively associated with student engagement and
satisfaction.
Positive results for transformational classroom leadership based on the Bass
(1985) model extend beyond the confines of the university classroom. Thus, Wilson
et al. (2012) found a positive association between transformational teaching and
student self-determined motivation and behavioural engagement in school-based
physical education. The authors also noted that their findings added to the
accumulated evidence suggesting that display of transformational teaching
behaviours in a physical education context enhances student self-determined
motivation, affective response (e.g. feelings about the teacher), self-efficacy (belief in
the ability to succeed) and intention to engage in the subject matter (in this case,
physical activity) in leisure time.
A few studies have also indicated the effectiveness of transformational classroom
leadership in a university online environment. For example, Livingston’s (2010) study
that employed 107 business administration students engaged in online instruction
indicated that both transformational leadership and transactional leadership were
related to student-reported extra effort, effectiveness and satisfaction with the former
more strongly correlated with all three outcome measures than the latter. Again, in an
online setting, Harrison (2011) found that instructor transformational leadership
behaviours were more significant predictors of cognitive learning, affective learning,
perceptions of instructor credibility and communication satisfaction than transactional
leadership behaviours.
Furthermore, studies that have departed somewhat from the original Bass (1985)
model but have employed notions in varying degrees similar to the original have
also confirmed the value of transformational classroom leadership. For example,
Harvey et al. (2003) employed a version of instructor transformational leadership
comprising charisma, intellectual stimulation and individual consideration and
found that intellectual stimulation and charisma together accounted for 66.3 per
cent of the variance in the prediction of instructor’s performance ratings and
intellectual stimulation and individual consideration combined accounted for 55.1
per cent of the variance in predicting student involvement. Bolkan and Goodboy
(2011) also examined the effect of instructor charismatic leadership on various
student resistance behaviours and found that instructors exhibiting charismatic
 QAE leadership attributes had a beneficial effect on these behaviours. Equally, Ruddell
(2008) employing a model of transformational leadership (Podsakoff et al., 1990) not
22,3 identical to but generally consistent with the original model (Bass, 1985) has argued
that transformational leadership provides a suitable framework for business ethics
instruction.
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

278 Transformational classroom leadership outcomes and academic

performance
The previous section of this paper indicates the enormous potential of classroom
transformational leadership to impact student outcomes and performance and to benefit
teachers in a variety of learning contexts including university and college environments.
In the case of students, research indicates that transformational classroom leadership
stimulates academic motivation, engagement and effort, fosters students’ intentions to
engage in instructional activities in their own time, engenders student self-efficacy and
facilitates cognitive and affecting learning. Similarly, relevant studies suggest that
teachers displaying transformational classroom leadership characteristics are
perceived by students to be effective classroom leaders and credible teachers. They also
experience a low level of teacher resistance behaviours and engender a high level of
in-class participation.
Although critics might argue that the data used in the various transformational
classroom leadership studies are self-reported, research indicates that many of the
educational outcomes resulting from the enactment of transformational leadership in
the classroom are associated with actual academic performance. Pounder (2009), for
example, noted evidence linking student effort to academic achievement and two
meta-analyses of factors predicting student academic performance have confirmed the
importance of student effort (Richardson et al., 2012; Robbins et al., 2004). Equally,
perceptions of teacher effectiveness have been shown to influence academic
performance (Akiri and Ugborugbo, 2009; Stephanou and Kyridis, 2012), and
satisfaction with the teacher is likely to have a positive influence on achievement in so
far as it contributes to overall satisfaction with academic life (Chambel and Curral, 2005).
A number of studies have also linked student motivation (Tella, 2007) and student
self-efficacy (House, 1996; Mucherah et al., 2010; Multon et al., 1991; Richardson et al.,
2012) to academic achievement. Furthermore, in a school setting, Voelkl (1995) found a
link between student participation and achievement, and at the university level, a study
by Millis et al. (2009) indicated an association between participation and examination
performance in a first-year medical school course. Finally, more than one study has
indicated an association between teacher credibility and cognitive and affective learning
(Pogue and AhYun, 2006; Gray et al., 2011). In summary, transformational classroom
leadership not only has a positive effect on student perception of the classroom
experience but also on student academic performance.

Discussion and future studies

Research indicates the potential of transformational classroom leadership to have a
significant impact on the quality of university teaching. Nevertheless, there are areas
that require further development to enable this potential to be fully realised and these
areas are discussed below.
 Development of transformational classroom leadership descriptors and measurement Quality teaching
scales
Bolkan and Goodboy (2011) have offered a set of instructor communication behaviours
through
describing Bass’s (1985) charisma, individualised consideration and intellectual transformational
stimulation transformational leadership characteristics. The authors derived these classroom
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

behavioral descriptors from the content analysis of students’ narratives on

transformational teaching. Similarly, Beauchamp et al. (2010) developed a reliable and 279
valid measure of transformational teaching, specifically for use within school-based
physical education contexts. However, despite these useful initiatives, generally
accepted descriptions of the characteristics of transformational classroom leadership
have yet to be agreed and the same can be said for the development of an instrument for
measuring this leadership notion. Moving classroom transformational leadership from
potential to practice requires that there be more agreement on both these aspects
amongst researchers.
Arguably, failure to establish this agreement has facilitated studies of
transformational classroom leadership that sometimes employ loose or
idiosyncratic transformational leadership models. In contrast, achieving a generally
agreed transformational leadership model and measuring instrument should
facilitate the type of replication of studies within and between universities, delivery
modes, schools etc., and across cultures that will afford classroom transformational
leadership and its results, a similar degree of credibility to the Bass (1985) model
from which it is derived.
Studies in which a transformational classroom leadership instrument has been
developed and tested for conceptual consistency with the original MLQ hold
promise for both the development of transformational classroom leadership
descriptors and measurement items. For example, the following are samples of
transformational classroom leadership items that comprised the classroom
leadership instrument in the Pounder (2008) study. They illustrate how the original
MLQ can be adapted for an instructional setting (the items refer to teacher behaviour
in the classroom):
• (idealised influence – attributed) he/she is not only concerned about his/her own
interests, but is genuinely concerned about the progress made by students;
• (idealised influence – behavior) he/she explains that a commitment to learning is
important for a student to succeed in this course;
• (inspirational motivation) he/she enthusiastically talks about what to do to make
the course a success;
• (intellectual stimulation) he/she critically thinks and comments on the
fundamental assumptions of a school of thought or theory; and
• (individual consideration) he/she is willing to provide help outside of class.

In the Pounder (2008) study, confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the classroom
leadership instrument was conceptually consistent with the original transformational
leadership model. While Pounder confined his research to the development of an
instrument capable of valid and reliable measurement and did not attempt to develop
descriptions of the transformational classroom leadership characteristic, they are
 QAE implied in the items developed to measure each of the transformational classroom
leadership characteristics.
22,3 In view of the above, one recommended line of research is to conduct additional
studies employing an instrument that has, thus far, indicated the capacity to
produce valid and reliable measurement of the transformational classroom
leadership construct, for example, that of Pounder (2008) or Bolkan and Goodboy
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

280 (2009). This instrument should be utilised across a variety of instructional

situations, e.g. levels of education (school, university, etc.), mode of education
(inclassroom, online and blended), subject content (e.g. management, mathematics
and philosophy) and even national educational systems. The aim of these studies
will be to move towards establishing a model of transformational leadership and a
measuring instrument with the degree of credibility and acceptance within the
academic community that is afforded the originating concept and instrument,
namely, transformational leadership (Bass, 1985) and the MLQ.

Faculty training and development

The line of research recommended in the previous section has implications for
faculty training and development aimed at implementing transformational
classroom leadership. A number of scholars have suggested that transformational
leadership can be taught (Barling et al., 1996; Bass, 1990; Bass and Riggio, 2006;
Kelloway et al., 2000; Kirkbride, 2006; Northouse, 2009; Pounder, 2009). For
example, Bass (1990) described two approaches to transformational leadership
training in a conventional organisational setting. The first involved personal
feedback and goal setting where leaders self-rate their performance using a
self-rating version of the MLQ and the same leaders are also rated by their
subordinates using the standard MLQ. Leaders are then counselled on discrepancies
between self-ratings and subordinate ratings. The outcome of counselling sessions
is a specific action plan for each participant designed to enhance transformational
leadership behaviours.
The second approach involves group-based workshops in which a variety of
exercises take place, such as brainstorming on effective or ineffective leadership and
watching videos illustrating various leadership styles, and all are linked to the theory of
transformational leadership. Consistent with the individual counselling approach, the
outcome of the group workshops is a specific action plan designed to enhance the
transformational leadership style of each of the participants.
Classroom leadership instruments that are adapted from the original MLQ
comprise behaviourally based statements that model the type of behaviour expected
in the various dimensions of transformational classroom leadership, and it would be
quite feasible to employ this instrument in an academic setting for the purpose of
faculty development aimed at producing transformational teachers using an
approach similar to that described by Bass (1990). Nevertheless, despite speculation
on how classroom leadership development might take place in an academic setting
(Pounder, 2009), there is a notable absence of studies that have actually put this into
practice. While this lack of practical application may be the result of a lack of general
agreement on a model of transformational classroom leadership and an instrument
of measurement, this should not prevent initiatives taking place, particularly given
the growing imperative to enhance the quality of university teaching mentioned at
 the beginning of this paper. This is because all initiatives that employ either one or Quality teaching
both of the two instruments mentioned in the previous section will advance the
transformational classroom leadership notion and its instrument of measurement.
through
transformational
classroom
Conclusion
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

This paper opened by noting the growing focus on the quality of education
experienced by university and college students. Drawing on observations made on 281
US, British, Australian and European higher education systems, it is evident that
there is general criticism of the standard of education being “delivered” to students.
At the centre of the criticism, either overt or implied, is the quality of university and
college teaching. At the time of writing, there seem to be more criticisms of teaching
quality than the “innovative approaches to teaching” called for by Tatlow (2012) and
referred to earlier in this paper. Accordingly, the time is right to examine innovative
ways of enhancing what takes place in the classroom with a view to delivering a
high-quality educational experience for students. In this context, research is
consistent in its indication that transformational leadership as a central element of
the classroom experience has much to offer not only students in terms of enhanced
educational outcomes but also faculty in the way they are perceived by their
students. A central aim of this paper has been to call on scholars to engage in studies
aimed at developing a model of transformational classroom leadership and an
associated instrument of measurement equivalent in degree of general acceptance to
the original transformational leadership model (Bass, 1985) and the MLQ.
Development of such a model and instrument should then enable universities and
colleges to unleash the potential of transformational classroom leadership with a
view to enhancing the quality of university teaching.

References
Akiri, A.A. and Ugborugbo, N.M. (2009), “Teachers’ effectiveness and students’ academic
performance in public secondary schools in Delta State, Nigeria”, Student Home
Community Science, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 107-113.
Al-Beraidi, A. and Rickards, T. (2003), “Creative team climate in an international accounting
office: an exploratory study in Saudi Arabia”, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 7-18.
Arum, R. and Roksa, J. (2011), “Are undergraduates actually learning anything?”, available at:
http://chronicle.com/article/Are-Undergraduates-Actually/125979/ (accessed 27 November
2013).
Avolio, B.J., Waldman, D.A. and Einstein, W.O. (1988), “Transformational leadership in a
management game simulation”, Group and Organization Studies, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 59-80.
Balwant, P. (2013), “The development of a parsimonious measure of transformational
instructor leadership”, Third Degree, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 23-34, available at: http://dss.
group.shef.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/The-development-of-a-parsimonious-
measure-of-transformational-instructor-leadership.pdf (accessed 27 November 2013).
Barling, J., Weber, T. and Kelloway, E.K. (1996), “Effects of transformational leadership training
and attitudinal and fiscal outcomes: a field experiment”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 81 No. 6, pp. 827-832.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.
 QAE Bass, B.M. (1990), “From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the
vision”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 19-31.
22,3 Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1989), Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire,
Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

Transformational Leadership, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

282 Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1997), Full Range Leadership Development: Manual for the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire, Mindgarden, Palo Alto, CA.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2000), Transformational Leadership ⫽ Organizational Success, Mind
Garden, Redwood City, CA.
Bass, B.M. and Riggio, R. (2006), Transformational Leadership, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Beauchamp, M.R., Barling, J., Li, Z., Morton, K.L., Keith, S.E. and Zumbo, B.D. (2010),
“Development and psychometric properties of the transformational teaching
questionnaire”, Journal of Health Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 8, pp. 1123-1134.
Bolkan, S. and Goodboy, A.K. (2009), “Transformational leadership in the classroom: fostering
student learning, student participation, and teacher credibility”, Journal of Instructional
Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 296-306.
Bolkan, S. and Goodboy, A.K. (2011), “Behavioral indicators of transformational leadership in the
college classroom”, Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 10-18.
Brewer, E.W. and Burgess, D.N. (2005), “Professor’s role in motivating students to attend class”,
Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 23-47.
Bycio, P., Hackett, R.D. and Allen, J.S. (1995), “Further assessments of Bass’s (1985)
conceptualization of transactional and transformational leadership”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 468-478.
Chambel, M.J. and Curral, L. (2005), “Stress in academic life: characteristics as predictors of
student well-being and performance”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 54
No. 1, pp. 135-147.
Cheng, Y.C. (1994), “Teacher leadership style: A classroom-level study”, Journal of Educational
Administration, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 54-71.
Coad, A.F. and Berry, A.J. (1998), “Transformational leadership and learning orientation”,
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 164-172.
Den Hartog, D.N., De Hoogh, A.H.B. and Keegan, A.E. (2007), “The interactive effects of
belongingness and charisma on helping and compliance”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 1131-1139.
Den Hartog, D.N., Van Muijen, J.J. and Koopman, P.L. (1997), “Transactional versus
transformational leadership: an analysis of the MLQ”, Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 19-29.
Farrel, M.A. (2000), “Developing a market-oriented learning organization”, Australian Journal of
Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 201-222.
Goodboy, A.K. and Myers, S.A. (2008), “The effect of teacher confirmation on student
communication and learning outcomes”, Communication Education, Vol. 57 No. 2,
pp. 153-179.
Gray, D.L., Anderson, E.M. and O’Connell, A.A. (2011), “Associations of teacher credibility and
teacher affinity with learning outcomes in health classrooms”, Social Psychology of
Education, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 185-208.
 Harrison, J.L. (2011), “Instructor transformational leadership and student outcomes”, Emerging Quality teaching
Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 91-119.
Harvey, S., Royal, M. and Stout, D. (2003), “Instructor’s transformational leadership: University
through
student attitudes and ratings”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 92 No. 2, pp. 395-402. transformational
Henard, F. and Roseveare, D. (2012), Fostering Quality Teaching in Higher Education: Policies and classroom
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

Practices: An IMHE Guide for Higher Education Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris.
House, J.D. (1996), “Student expectancies and academic self-concept as predictors of science 283
achievement”, The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 130 No. 6, pp. 679-681.
Howell, J.M. and Frost, P.J. (1989), “A laboratory study of charismatic leadership”, Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 243-269.
Kelloway, E.K., Barling, J. and Helleur, J. (2000), “Enhancing transformational leadership: the role
of training and feedback”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3,
pp. 145-149.
Kirkbride, P. (2006), “Developing transformational leaders: the full range leadership model in
action”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 23-32.
Kirkpatrick, S.A. and Locke, E.A. (1996), “Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic
leadership components on performance and attitudes”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 36-51.
Livingston, R.K. (2010), “An investigation of transformational leadership in a virtual learning
environment”, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University, Minneapolis, MN.
Luechauer, D.L. and Shulman, G.M. (2002), “Creating empowered learners: a decade trying to
practice what we teach”, Organization Development Journal, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 42-51.
Lyons, P. (1995), Classroom as Learning Organizations: Challenging Assumptions and Processes,
ERIC Project, Washington, DC (ED 384304).
Millis, R.M., Dyson, S. and Cannon, D. (2009), “Association of classroom participation and
examination performance in a first-year medical school course”, Advances in Physiology
Education, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 139-143.
Mucherah, W., Dixon, F., Hartley, K. and Hardin, T. (2010), “Perceptions of self-concept and actual
academic performance in Math and English among high school students in Kenya”,
Education Research, Vol. 1 No. 8, pp. 263-275.
Multon, K.D., Brown, S.D. and Kent, R.W. (1991), “Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic
outcomes: a meta-analytic investigation”, Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 1,
pp. 30-38.
Neumann, A. (1992), “Colleges under pressure: budgeting, presidential competence, and faculty
uncertainty”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 191-215.
Northouse, P.G. (2009), Leadership: Theory and Practice, Sage Publications, Thousands Oak, CA.
Norton, A., Sonnemann, J. and Cherastidtham, I. (2013), “Taking university teaching seriously”,
available at: http://grattan.edu.au/static/files/assets/aa7940a6/191_Taking-Teaching-
Seriously.pdf (accessed 29 November 2013).
Wang, M.C., Haertel, G.D. and Walberg, H.J. (1993/1994), “What Helps Students Learn?”,
Educational Leadership, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 74-79.
Ojode, L.A., Walumbwa, F.O. and Kuchinke, P. (1999), “Developing human capital for the evolving
work environment: transactional and transformational leadership within instructional
setting”, paper presented at the annual conference of the Midwest Academy of
Management, April 16-17, Lincoln, NE.
 QAE Parry, K. (2000), “Does leadership help the bottom line?”, New Zealand Management, Vol. 47 No. 3,
pp. 38-41.
22,3 Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H. and Fetter, R. (1990), “Transformational
leadership behaviours and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction and
organisational citizenship behaviours”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 107-142.
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

Pogue, L.L. and AhYun, K. (2006), “The effects of teacher nonverbal immediacy and credibility on
284 student motivation and affective learning”, Communication Education, Vol. 55 No. 3,
pp. 331-344.
Pounder, J.S. (2008), “Full range classroom leadership: implications for the cross organizational
and cross cultural applicability of the transformational-transactional paradigm”,
Leadership, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 115-135.
Pounder, J.S. (2009), “Transformational classroom leadership: a basis for academic staff
development”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 317-325.
Richardson, M., Abraham, C. and Bond, R. (2012), “Psychological correlates of university students’
academic achievement: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 138 No. 2, pp. 353-387.
Robbins, S.B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R. and Carlstrom, A. (2004), “Do psychosocial
and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 130 No. 2, pp. 261-288.
Ruddell, L. (2008), “Transformational leadership as an effective classroom leadership model for
business ethics instruction”, Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2,
pp. 49-68.
Slater, S. and Narver, J. (1995), “Market orientation and the learning organization”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 63-74.
Stephanou, G. and Kyridis, A. (2012), “University students’ perceptions of teacher effectiveness
and emotions in lectures: the role of socio-cognitive factors, and academic performance”,
International Education Studies, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 58-79.
Strong-Rhoads, K.J. (2011), “Transformational classroom leadership: adding a new piece of fabric
to the educational leadership quilt”, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, CA State University,
Long Beach, CA.
Sze, S. and Kester-Phillips, D. (2008), “Getting down to business - classroom management”,
Institute for Learning Centred Education, Niagara University, available at: www.
lby100.com/ly/200806/P020080627327680144604.pdf (accessed 28 November 2013).
Tatlow, P. (2012), “British universities are in need of a teaching revolution”, available at: www.
guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2012/feb/15/uk-universities-teaching-
revolution (accessed 29 November 2013).
Tella, A. (2007), “The impact of motivation on student’s academic achievement and learning
outcomes in mathematics among secondary school students in Nigeria”, Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 149-156.
Tsai, K.C. and Lin, K. (2012), “Rethink student evaluation of teaching”, World Journal of
Education, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 17-22.
Voelkl, K.E. (1995), “School warmth, student participation, and achievement”, The Journal of
Experimental Education, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 127-138.
Walumbwa, F.O. and Ojode, L.A. (2000), “Gender stereotype and instructors’ leadership behavior:
transformational and transactional leadership”, paper presented at the annual conference of
the Midwest Academy of Management, March 30-April 1, Chicago, IL.
 Weaver, R.R. and Qi, J. (2005), “Classroom organization and participation: college students’ Quality teaching
perception”, The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 76 No. 5, pp. 570-601.
Wilson, A.J., Liu, Y., Keith, S.E., Wilson, A.H., Kermer, L.E., Zumbo, B.D. and Beauchamp, M.R.
through
(2012), “Transformational teaching and child psychological needs satisfaction, motivation, transformational
and engagement in elementary school physical education”, Sport, Exercise and classroom
Performance Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 215-230.
Downloaded by BAHRIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER SCIENCE At 00:11 30 September 2015 (PT)

Further reading
285
Avolio, B.J. (1999), Full Leadership Development: Building the Vital Forces, Sage Publication,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Boyd, B.L. (2009), “Using a case study to develop the transformational teaching theory”, Journal of
Leadership Education, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 50-59.
Sosik, J.J., Avolio, B.J. and Kahai, S.S. (1997), “Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group
potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system environment”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 1, pp. 89-103.

About the author

James Pounder is currently a Professor of Management and Director of Teaching and Learning at
Lingnan University in Hong Kong. He holds a PhD in Management from Brunel University and a
Doctorate in Education from the University of Leicester. He has written extensively in both the
management and education fields and he has a particular interest in the application of
transformational leadership in an instructional context. James Pounder can be contacted at:
pounder@ln.edu.hk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints