Principals’ digital instructional leadership during the pandemic: Impact on teachers’ intrinsic motivation and students’ learning

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic caused education systems to embrace remote schooling and online learning. In the context of this dramatic change, the principal's role has also changed. Instead of interacting face to face, school leaders had to become distant leaders operating digitally. The field has no knowledge of digital instructional leadership. The study used new and adapted measures to explore principals’ digital instructional leadership, its mechanisms of operation, and its outcomes. In particular, the research examined how digital instructional leadership affects perceived student learning in online settings through teachers’ intrinsic motivation for digital instruction (i.e. the mediator). The study used data from 380 teachers in Bahrain. Results indicated support for mediation. This is an empirical exploratory study, and therefore it is limited in scope. Nevertheless, its concepts, measures, and findings offer valuable contributions to research and practice. The limitations, findings, and implications of the study are discussed. The significance of the study derives from the growing incorporation of hybrid schooling in education and digital instructional leadership practices in mainstream principalship.

Principal's abusive leadership and teachers' intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: the moderating roles of duration of relationship and group size

“…Teachers' motivations in the field of education are linked to their desire to work in the field, their use of pedagogical methods, and their enthusiasm for managing the classroom and students' behavior (Tang et al, 2020). School leadership is one of the elements that affect teachers' motivation (Berkovich and Hassan, 2022). By fostering a common vision and offering teachers support and feedback, transformational school leadership can boost teachers' motivation (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017;Eyal and Roth, 2011).…”

“…, 2020). School leadership is one of the elements that affect teachers' motivation (Berkovich and Hassan, 2022). By fostering a common vision and offering teachers support and feedback, transformational school leadership can boost teachers' motivation (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017; Eyal and Roth, 2011).…”

“…The success of the school in achieving its organizational goals and enhancing its performance is dependent largely on leadership, which has been shown to significantly affect teachers in the classroom (Saitis and Saiti, 2018). Principals' positive leadership behaviors play a crucial role in creating a positive work environment that fosters teachers' motivations, leading to improved teaching effectiveness and student outcomes (Berkovich and Hassan, 2022; Eyal and Roth, 2011). Positive school leadership models and their effect on teachers' motivation have received considerable research attention, but not so negative school leadership models.…”

Teachers' intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as mediators of the effect of principals' perceived distributed leadership on organizational learning capability

“…Teachers' motivation is affected by different factors, including school leadership (Berkovich and Hassan, 2022). Transformational school leadership can increase the teachers' motivation by promoting a shared vision and providing support and feedback for teachers (Berkovich and Eyal, 2017;Eyal and Roth, 2011).…”

Leadership for inclusive online learning in public primary schools during COVID-19: A multiple case study in Hong Kong

“…Theoretically, this article seeks to reorient the discourse from explaining leadership in a specific educational context to an analytical framework which conceptualises school relationships being linked together with families and the wider community as an enabling environment for supporting online learning for children from poor families. Many recent studies seek to explain leadership practices by referencing individual leaders and their interactions, such as resilience in times of uncertainty and situational ambiguity ( Beauchamp et al, 2021 ), the framing and enactment of changing policy ( Fotheringham et al, 2022 ), sensemaking orientations ( Longmuir, 2021 ), instructional leadership practices in crisis ( Shaked, 2022 ), and leadership for enhancing digital instruction ( Berkovich and Hassan, 2022 ). These focuses may reflect the mainstream paradigm in educational leadership literature which is primarily based on the doctrines of methodological individualism, or what Lakomski and Evers (2022) term ‘leader centrism’.…”