Leadership Attributes of Female Secondary Career and Technical

LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES OF FEMALE SECONDARY CAREER AND TECHNICAL

EDUCATION TEACHERS IN GEORGIA

TEDRA HAYNES WHITE

(Under the Direction of Bettye P. Smith)

ABSTRACT

Transformational leadership recognizes that those not in formal administrative positions have authority and influence. Distributed leadership is transformational leadership in education and is defined by the influence that is exhibited by individuals at all levels rather than just the people at the top (Leithwood et al, 2007). This type of leadership suggests that every person in any position can demonstrate leadership in some way (Coleman, 2005). With this understanding of distributive leadership, it is likely that more teachers will find themselves with leadership responsibilities. Teacher leadership is exhibited through a variety of formal and informal roles and positions (Gronn, 2000; Leithwood et al., 2007). Women are expected to be less effective leaders and face stereotyping as a significant barrier to the quest for advanced leadership roles

(Sanchez-Hucles and Davis, 2010). As with women in leadership in other industries, women are an underutilized resource for leadership in CTE and therefore the purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between leadership attributes, and professional characteristics and leadership attributes and personal characteristics of secondary female teachers in career and

technical education programs in Georgia. Leadership attributes, professional and personal characteristics were investigated because insight into these attributes and characteristics may influence the emergence of teacher leadership for female secondary CTE teachers.

The sample for this study was 179 female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia. Over 30%

(32%) of the desired sample participated in the study. Study findings revealed that the female secondary CTE teachers rated 12, or 32.43%, of the attributes as very descriptive of themselves and rated 25, or 67.57%, of the attributes as being somewhat descriptive to descriptive of them.

This study found that 35.2% of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia surveyed have a desire to take on leadership roles. These teachers identified 21 leadership positions that they desire to have. This signifies that the teachers believe that they possess the leadership attributes that predisposes them to successful leadership performance. Details revealing the statistical significance of the relationships between the variables are shared, as well as, recommendations for practice and further research.

INDEX WORDS: Teacher Leadership; Leadership Attributes; Personal Characteristics; Professional Characteristics; Female Secondary Teachers; Career and Technical Education; Distributed Education

LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES OF FEMALE SECONDARY CAREER AND TECHNICAL

EDUCATION TEACHERS IN GEORGIA

TEDRA HAYNES WHITE

B.S.F.C.S., University of Georgia, 1995

M.P.A., University of West Georgia, 1998

A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

ATHENS, GEORGIA

2011

Tedra Haynes White

LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES OF FEMALE SECONDARY CAREER AND TECHNICAL

EDUCATION TEACHERS IN GEORGIA

TEDRA HAYNES WHITE

Major Professor: Bettye P. Smith

Committee: Robert Wicklein Myra N. Womble

Electronic Version Approved:

Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia December 2011

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to the most supportive mother in the world, Lorene L. Haynes and to the memory of my father and superhero, Troy Lee Haynes. I love you both and I miss you

Daddy! I really wish that you were here to see this!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thank you JESUS!!! Without you Lord I would have been unable to start let alone finish this process. Your will for my life is clearly evident and it is you that I want to hear say “well done.” Thank you for your goodness, your grace, and your mercy.

Thank you to the best husband, son, and daughter in the world – Nicholas, Miles, and

Marley White for your loving support, encouragement, and cooperation. I love you!

Thank you to my mother, Lorene L. Haynes. I can‟t even begin to express what you mean to me and what it has meant to have your love, support, encouragement. Thank you for all that you have done, especially for all of the babysitting! Mere words do not describe my appreciation for you and all you have done for me.

Thank you to my committee members, Dr. Bettye P. Smith, Dr. Robert Wicklein, and Dr.

Myra N. Womble. Dr. Smith, thank you for serving as my committee chair and providing your assistance and guidance throughout this process. Dr. Womble and Dr. Wicklein, thank you for the commitment of your invaluable time and insight.

Finally, I would like to thank my brothers, Bernard and Brian, and my wonderful friends for your encouragement and support throughout my educational pursuits. I love you all.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v

LIST OF TABLES ...... viii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Statement of Purpose ...... 8

Theoretical Framework ...... 9

Significance of the Study ...... 11

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...... 14

Leadership Theories and Models ...... 14

Leadership in Education ...... 25

Teacher Leadership ...... 26

Leadership and Career and Technical Education (CTE) ...... 29

Women in Leadership ...... 32

Leadership Attributes, Professional and Personal Characteristics ...... 36

3 METHOD ...... 47

Purpose and Research Questions ...... 47

Research Design...... 48

Participants ...... 49

Instrumentation ...... 54

Pilot Study ...... 59

Procedure ...... 60

Data Analysis ...... 62

4 FINDINGS ...... 66

Analyses of Research Questions ...... 67

5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 92

Summary of the Study ...... 92

Summary of Findings ...... 97

Conclusions ...... 101

Recommendations ...... 105

Summary ...... 106

REFERENCES ...... 108

APPENDICES

A LEADER ATTRIBUTES INVENTORY ...... 118

B LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES – FIVE FACTORS ...... 124

C CRONBACH‟S ALPHA ...... 126

D INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) APPROVAL ...... 128

E LETTER REQUESTING PERMISSION TO USE THE INSTRUMENT ...... 130

F LETTER GRANTING PERMISSION TO USE THE INSTRUMENT ...... 132

G FIRST EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE TO PARTICIPANTS ...... 134

H FOLLOW-UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS ...... 136

I FINAL FOLLOW-UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS ...... 138

J PARTICIPANTS OPEN ENDED FEEDBACK AND COMMENTS ...... 140

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1: Data Analysis for Research Questions ...... 65

Table 2: Frequencies and Percentages for the 37 Leadership Attributes by Clusters ...... 69

Table 3: Means and Standard Deviations for Leadership Attributes ...... 73

Table 4: Descriptive Statistics for Professional Characteristics ...... 76

Table 5: Desired Future Leadership Roles...... 78

Table 6: Descriptive Statistics for Personal Characteristics ...... 79

Table 7: Correlations of Leadership Attributes by Clusters and Professional Characteristics for

Years of Teaching and Educational Level ...... 80

Table 8: Correlations of Leadership Attributes and Professional Characteristics for Location of

School, Area of Teaching, and Desire for Future Leadership Role ...... 85

Table 9: Correlations of Leadership Attributes and Personal Characteristic for Age ...... 88

Table 10: Correlations of Leadership Attributes and Personal Characteristic for Race ...... 91

viii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

For more than a half century, a plethora of researchers have attempted to identify and describe leadership from many different perspectives (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999; Bass, 2008;

Bennis & Goldsmith, 2003; Jago, 1982; Hersey & Blanchard, 1982; Kouzes & Posner, 2002;

Northouse, 2004; Stogdill, 1974; Yukl, 1981). Consequently, there are numerous perspectives of leadership found in the literature (Bass, 2008). As early as the 1920s, leadership centered around the will of the leader, the followers, and the leader‟s ability to induce obedience, cooperation, respect, and loyalty (Bass, 2008). In the 1930s, leadership was viewed as a process whereby, the leader organized followers to move in a specific direction (Northouse, 2004). In the 1940s, leadership focused on the leader‟s ability to persuade and direct, while the 1950s‟ view of leadership centered on what leaders did in the group (Northouse, 2004). Leadership in the 1960s was represented by the influence leaders had to move followers and the 1970s focused on viewing the leader‟s influence as discretionary. Then, the 1980s ushered in the viewpoint of leadership as inspiring followers into purposeful action. In the 1990s, leadership was about the influence of the leader and of the followers as they took action that reflected their common purposes (Northouse, 2004). The twenty-first century marks the viewpoint of the leader being held responsible and accountable for the groups‟ actions (Bass, 2008). This abundance of descriptions and perspectives leads one to believe that leadership is in the eye of the beholder

(Kenney, Blascovich, & Shaver, 1994).

Northouse (2004) explained that leadership is a complex process and has multiple dimensions, while Johns and Moser (2001) postulated that the mystique of leadership is almost impossible to describe, whether political, religious, or educational. It is leadership; however, that makes the difference in our schools, businesses, communities, churches and public agencies

(Bass, 2008). While there are various perspectives on what leadership is, there is continual high demand for effective leadership (Northouse, 2004). Perhaps in response to the need for leaders in the private sector, educational institutions have created numerous programs in leadership studies (Northouse, 2004). According to Bennis and Goldsmith (2003), the problems that society faces are too complex, widespread, and numerous for only the top leaders in high positions to address these problems. Education, therefore, has to be handled with visionary leadership from everyone including administrators and teachers.

Leadership in Education

The conventional understanding of leadership in education is that it is the responsibility of administrators and professionals with non-teaching responsibilities (Silva, Gimbert, & Nolan,

2000). The principal, who is viewed as the primary source of expertise of the school, is responsible for maintaining high expectations for both teachers and students, coordinating curriculum, supervising classroom instruction, and monitoring student progress (Marks & Printy,

2003). Hart (1995) concluded that principals have primarily been identified as the visionary leader in school environments. Some transformational leaders, both administrators and teachers, recognize that those not in formal administrative positions also have authority and influence

(Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999; Timperley, 2005). Transformational leadership recognizes that those not in formal administrative positions have authority and influence. This power is given by followers to those who can inspire others to collective aspirations and have the personal desire to

2 accomplish these goals (Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999). Distributed leadership is transformational leadership and is defined by the influence that is exhibited by individuals at all levels rather than just the people at the top (Leithwood, Mascall, Strauss, Sacks, Memom, & Yashkina, 2007).

Distributive leadership is one of the many components of transformational leadership

(Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999; Timperley, 2005). Distributed leadership is not the same as simply dividing tasks among different individuals who can perform specific defined roles (Timperley,

2005). The distribution of leadership is influenced by the willingness of teachers and principals to view their positions differently. Some principals may see leadership distribution as weakening their own power. Teachers who already have busy schedules are hesitant to take on additional responsibilities. Primary and secondary teachers enter the educational field with the expectation of, and a focus on, working with students rather than with other adults (Leithwood et al., 2007).

However, the concept of distributive leadership includes those in non-administrative roles such as teachers and parent/guardians.

Teacher Leadership

The focus of leadership in the field of education is now on principalship. Research indicates that multiple leaders are involved in school leadership, some with and some without a formal leadership position (Fullan, 1996; Spillane, 2005). These positions include principals, assistant principals, and teachers. The concept of distributed leadership advocates decentralization of the school leader. This type of leadership suggests that every person in any position can demonstrate leadership in some way (Coleman, 2005). While this view of leadership does not mean that everyone is a leader, it presents the possibility for more fluid and emergent leadership by people at all levels rather than by fixed leadership of the people at the top

(Gronn, 2000; Leithwood et al., 2007). With this understanding of distributive leadership, it is likely that more teachers will find themselves with leadership responsibilities.

Leithwood and Jantzi (1999) argue that putting the word teacher in front of the word leadership doesn‟t give leadership a new meaning. It does, however, imply a distributed form of leadership with teachers possessing power and influence within a school. Harris (2003) supports this argument by defining teacher leadership as the utilization of leadership by teachers without regard to position or designation. Teacher leadership is rooted in the education reforms of the

1980s and focuses on leaders who influence others to improve their educational practices

(Sabatini, 2002), and is committed to improving professional learning opportunities for self and others (Galland, 2008). In the early 1980s, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational

Reform (1983) ignited national, state, and local school reform efforts after it reported that the educational foundations of society was being eroded by mediocrity and put out the call for the urgent need for immediate improvement. Along with recommendations in the areas of content, standards and expectations, time, and leadership and fiscal support, the report recommended the improvement of teachers with the report specifically focusing on teacher leadership through master teachers who take on the leadership roles of supervision of other teachers and leadership in the designing of teacher preparation programs.

Teacher leadership has flourished in situations where it is actively supported or encouraged by principals (York-Barr & Duke, 2004). The extent to which teachers take on leadership roles depends on the culture of the school, the relationship between teachers and the principal, opportunity, and principal encouragement and support (Leithwood et al., 2007).

Principals may lack the experience and knowledge that it takes to effectively support higher levels of teacher leadership. This difficulty lies in the issues that arise due to the complicated

4 task of clarifying the boundaries of teacher leadership, principal leadership, and the areas of common ground (Muijs & Harris, 2003; York-Barr & Duke, 2004).

While teacher leadership is not new, the recognition and expanded roles of teacher leadership and its contribution to school improvement is a new and significant focus (York-Barr

& Duke, 2004). Furthermore, investments have been made on advancing the concept and practice of teacher leadership. When performing in a leadership role, teachers have the ability to help shape schools while maintaining their influence in the classroom (Marks & Printy, 2003).

Teacher leadership is exhibited through a variety of formal and informal roles and positions.

They include formal positions such as curriculum specialists and department heads (Silva,

Gimbert & Nolan, 2000; York-Barr & Duke, 2004) and informal roles such as coaching of peers and working in and leading small groups and teams (York-Barr & Duke, 2004). Teachers who assume informal roles are allowed to lead by their peers because they show high levels of instructional expertise, collaboration, reflection, and empowerment (Small & Swanson, 2000;

York-Barr & Duke, 2004). Teacher leadership increases when professional development geared toward the development of certain knowledge, skills, or attributes is easily accessible (Leithwood et al., 2007). Marks and Printy (2003) deem educational reform and school improvement as more successful when teachers are involved in leadership roles. Therefore, teacher leadership is needed in all areas and levels of education including career and technical education (CTE) when educational reform and school improvement are major issues.

Teacher Leadership in Career and Technical Education (CTE)

There has been much research conducted regarding the issue of teacher leadership

(Ackerman & MacKenzie, 2006; Barth, 2001; Donaldson, 2007; Harris, 2002; Muijs & Harris,

2003; Phelps, 2008). However, a paucity of existing research was identified in the literature that

5 addressed teacher leadership in career and technical education (Vail, 1991; Vail & Pedras, 1994;

Vail & Reddick, 1993). Vail and Pedras (1994) stated that it is impossible to improve student performance without promoting leadership of teachers. Therefore, developing the capacity of leadership among teachers is one way to help the career and technical education (CTE) field meet the challenge of improving student achievement. Anyone can be considered a leader regardless of the position that he or she may hold and there must be leaders in all professional roles in order for the career and technical educational system to reach its potential (Finch, 1991;

Moss & Johansen, 1991; Moss, 1994). Furthermore, Moss and Liang (1991) declared that what

CTE needs is strong leadership at all levels, and in all professional roles in order to achieve peak efficiency. There is a need for strong leadership in delivering workforce education to young and adult students and strong leadership for professional associations. Thereby, the National

Leadership Institute was created in 2001 with the purpose of developing leadership in CTE program educators. According to Gregson and Allen (2007), members of the institute identified a lack of new leaders to fill future needs as one of the overriding issues facing career and technical education.

In order to gain the strong leadership needed in career and technical education programs,

Moss and Liang (1991) propose that there needs to be an assessment of existing attributes, an identification of attributes that might be strengthened, and other appropriate leadership development. Furthermore, there needs to be deliberate educational interventions in order to develop leadership attributes. This development of leadership attributes needs to cause career and technical education program educators to begin to recognize opportunities to emerge as leaders, take advantage of these opportunities and succeed as leaders in various situations and professional roles. This is true for both male and female career and technical education teachers.

Women in Leadership and Teacher Leadership

Early leadership research, prior to 1980, used only men as the sample (Klenke, 1996); researchers, white males, were not interested in gender or race differences (Sanchez-Hucles &

Davis, 2010). In 2009, a Catalyst (an organization that researches women in business) survey found that 51% of those in professional and managerial positions in the US labor force were women. However, only 3% of the top positions in Fortune 500 companies were women.

While women have made significant strides in obtaining leadership positions, barriers still remain. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) point to an existing gender bias that has men associated with leadership because they show more masculine traits that are identified with leadership, such as assertiveness, and dominance, whereas women are perceived less as leaders because of the likeliness of showing qualities such as compassion. Women also face stereotyping as a significant barrier to the quest for advanced leadership roles. For example, women are expected to be less effective leaders. Oakley (2000) suggests that female leadership styles resulted in positive outcomes for organizations in terms of communication, structure, negotiations, and authority.

Women represent 73% of all teachers, but constitute less than 35% of all principalships

(Loder & Spillane, 2005). Wrushen and Sherman (2008) determined that while women make up at least half the population of secondary teachers, they are in the minority in administrative positions comprising only 19% of secondary principals. Although the topic of teacher leadership has been researched extensively in the literature (Barth, 2001; Galland, 2008; Muijs & Harris,

2003; York-Barr & Duke, 2004), there has been limited research on teacher leadership in CTE and none found that focuses on CTE and women. Vail‟s (1991) research examined predictors of leadership behaviors of CTE teachers as compared to non CTE teachers in Ohio and used all

7 program areas. By focusing on women it could possibly increase the pool for additional CTE teacher leaders by focusing on the overlooked leadership potential of female CTE teachers. By increasing the number of potential women leaders it creates a leadership pool that more closely resembles the makeup of secondary educators overall. It will also ensure that there are support networks and mentoring for those women who aspire to leadership positions (Wrushen &

Sherman, 2008).

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this survey study was to examine the relationship between leadership attributes and professional characteristics, and leadership attributes and personal characteristics of secondary female teachers in career and technical education (CTE) programs in Georgia. The

CTE program areas included agriculture education, business education, family and consumer sciences, healthcare science, marketing, and technology education. The dependent variable in this study is leadership attributes, and the independent variables are professional characteristics and personal characteristics. The specific research questions of this study are following.

1. What are the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience,

educational level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future

leadership position

c. Personal characteristics included race and age

2. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and the professional

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience, educational

level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership

position

3. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and personal characteristics of

secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Personal characteristics included: race and age

Theoretical Framework

Several theories of leadership were sought to guide this study. Leadership research in recent years has focused on empowerment, collaboration, and the behaviors of leaders

(Northouse, 2004). Kezar, Carducci, and Contreras-McGavin (2006) posit that studies continue to demonstrate that certain traits remain important to the leadership process. The trait theory proposes that people are leaders by having been born with certain physical, social, and personal characteristics (Northouse, 2004). Behavior theory, on the other hand, focuses on what leaders do, how they act and what can be learned and developed (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004).

Transformational leadership was selected as the framework for this study because, while it encompasses a combination of both the behavioral and trait theories, transformational leadership recognizes that those not in formal administrative positions have authority and influence. This

9 power is given by followers to those who can inspire others to collective aspirations and have the personal desire to accomplish these goals (Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999). Teacher leadership falls under the category of distributed leadership. Distributed leadership falls under the category of transformational leadership. It is influence that is exhibited by individuals at all levels rather than just the people at the top. The distribution of leadership is influenced by the willingness of teachers and principals to view their positions differently (Leithwood et al., 2007).

Moss and Johansen (1991) proposed that the process of leadership is the perception of knowing when change is needed and influencing the group through noncoercive means such as persuasion in order to achievement the group goals. The property of leadership is given to a person when other members of a group perceive the person to possess certain characteristics or qualities. The specific properties of leadership depend on the behaviors accepted by the group as leadership behaviors. A leader‟s behaviors are determined by their attributes or qualities interacting with the attributes of the group members, the task at hand, and how the organization is operating.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership is the process of changing and transforming individuals, both leader and follower. It happens when a leader engages with followers in such a way that the connection raises the motivation level and morality of both the leader and the follower.

Transformational leadership moves followers to achieve more that what is expected of them and is effective at developing followers to their fullest potential (Bass, 2008).

Transformational leadership consists of characteristics that leaders display. There are several factors that Bass (2008) used to clarify his model of transformational leadership. These factors include charisma or an idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual

10 stimulation, and individualized consideration. Charisma or idealized influence describes leaders who act as strong role models for followers and provide followers with a vision and mission.

Inspirational motivation describes leaders who communicate high expectations to followers.

Intellectual stimulation describes leadership that motivates followers to be innovative, creative and challenge their beliefs and values, the leader‟s, and the organization‟s as well. Individualized consideration describes leaders who act as coaches and advisors who understand the needs of followers while providing a supportive environment (Northouse, 2004).

Moss and Johansen (1991) developed a leadership attributes inventory to assess 37 attributes or characteristics, knowledge, values, and skills an individual has that predispose them to successful transformational leadership and shape a leader‟s behavior (Dubinsky, Yammarino

& Jolson, 1995; Moss & Jensrud, 1996). These attributes were compiled by the creators after a review of literature. Their research sought to determine what leadership attributes, as demonstrated by behavior was reflective of a successful CTE leader and could determine an individual‟s tendency to perform certain behaviors that can improve and transform an organization (Liang, Chiou, & Liou, 2001; Moss & Jensrud, 1996; Moss & Johansen, 1991).

Therefore, a leadership theory that combines both the attributes and behaviors of leadership was chosen for this study.

Significance of the Study

The existing gender bias in leadership points to men being associated with more masculine traits that are identified with leadership, whereas women are perceived less as leaders because of the likeliness of showing qualities such as compassion (Sanchez-Hucles & Davis,

2010). Gender is an important factor in the perception of what characteristics are believed to be most important for effective teaching (Minor, Onwuegbuzie, Witcher, & James, 2002). Stevens,

Wood, and Sheehan (2002) propose that the male perspective of education places emphasis on rationality, order, and power over any personal and emotional attachment. Minor et al. (2002) suggests that the historical lack of gender consideration in schools may be indicative of female teachers desire to create a caring educational environment. Eagly and Johnson (1990) concluded that women tend to adopt a more participative style and a less directive style than their male counterparts.

According to Moss and Johansen (1991), it is imperative for career and technical education to fill leadership gaps by identifying potential teacher leaders who display transformational leadership attributes, characteristics, and behaviors. Although prior research has focused on teacher leadership, this study is important because it will determine if there is a relationship between the leaders attributes and professional characteristics and leadership attributes and personal characteristics specific to career and technical education and secondary female CTE teachers.

The importance of this study identified the professional characteristics and personal characteristics of female CTE teachers in Georgia, and established if there is a correlation between these characteristics and the leadership attributes identified by Moss and Liang (1991) of female teachers. Knowledge gained of how professional characteristics and personal characteristics relate to leadership attributes can assist CTE leaders, professional development coordinators, and trainers in broadening the leadership pool by effectively identifying potential female CTE leaders and preparing these leaders to be successful. It may also help to increase the professional development of CTE teachers.

Results of this research have practical implications for identifying potential teacher leaders, including an increased view at potential female leaders in career and technical education.

This research may also assist administrators, teacher education departments, and state staff in the planning and implementation of leadership, professional development programs, and mentoring opportunities aimed at secondary CTE teacher leaders.

This research will add to the existing body of literature on teacher leadership generally and specifically in CTE and update the data related to leadership in CTE. It will also bring attention to the fact that women are an underutilized resource for leadership in CTE. In conclusion, this study will investigate potential relationships between leadership attributes and professional characteristics and leadership attributes and personal characteristics of female CTE teachers. The study will focus on female CTE teachers and seeks to help identify additional CTE teacher leaders by focusing on the overlooked potential of female CTE teachers as leaders.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The purpose in this chapter is to present the related literature on leadership. The review included information on leadership theories and models, the theoretical framework undergirding this study, leadership relative to education, teachers and women, leadership attributes, personal characteristics, and professional characteristics.. The review is presented according to the aforementioned topics.

Leadership Theories and Models

The literature on leadership theories and models tends to be categorized into four major theories of leadership. The first theory is the trait theories which focus on the leader as a person.

The second theory of leadership is behavior theories which focus on the leader‟s behavior. The next theory of leadership is situational theories that focus on the effects of the leader in certain situations. The last and fourth theory is transformational theories that focus on the process of changing and transforming both leader and follower (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2001, Yukl, 1989).

The following paragraphs will discuss each of the theories of leadership listed above.

Trait Theory

In the early 1900s, leadership research focused on the idea that people are born with certain personality and character traits. Since certain traits were associated with proficient leadership, researchers sought to identify the traits, characteristics, and qualities which differentiated leaders from non-leaders. Researchers focused on identifying the traits of political, military, and social leaders. They believed that only great leaders had these traits and that these

14 great leaders were born with them (Bass, 1990; Northouse, 2004). This school of thought was known as the great man theory. From the great man theory, the trait theory evolved. This theory focused on the personality characteristics, social background, physical traits and abilities of individuals in order to identify leaders.

The trait theory assumes that if you could identify people with the correct traits, you will be able to identify leaders. Trait theory proposes that people are born leaders or non-leaders.

Yukl (1981) found that these early researchers were confident that traits could be identified that were essential for effective leadership. The first major survey on the research on traits was completed by Stogdill in 1948. Stodgill‟s findings on more than 124 trait research studies, indicated that while there was an identifiable group of important leadership traits, intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence and sociability, that made the leader different form the group member; he also found that a person does not become a leader simply because he or she possess these traits. The research pointed to the fact that the traits must be relevant to the situation and that a leader in one situation may not necessarily be a leader in a different situation. From Stodgill‟s research a new approach to leadership research focusing on leadership situations and leadership behaviors began (Northouse, 2004).

In 1959, R.D. Mann conducted a trait study that was similar to Stogdill‟s. He looked at over

1,400 surveys regarding personality and leadership. Mann suggested that personality traits could be used to differentiate leaders from non-leaders. He identified leaders as being strong in intelligence, adjustment, masculinity, extroversion, dominance, and conservatism (Bass, 2008;

Northouse, 2004). Over a decade later, in 1974, Stodgill conducted a second survey that analyzed

163 new studies and compared them to his first study. The second survey argued that both personality traits and situational factors determined leadership. This second survey validated that

15 a leader‟s traits, while not the only part of leadership, are definitely a part of leadership.

Stodgill‟s second survey included another list of traits associated with leadership. This list includes, drive for responsibility and task completion; vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals; venturesomeness and originality in problem solving; drive to exercise initiative in social situations; self-confidence and sense of personal identity; willingness to accept consequences of decision and action; readiness to absorb interpersonal stress; willingness to tolerate frustration and delay; ability to influence other persons‟ behavior; and capacity to structure social interactions systems to the purpose at hand (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004; Zaccaro, 2007).

In 1986, R.G. Lord used a meta-analysis to reassess the findings of Mann‟s 1959 findings. He and his colleagues, DeVager and Alliger, argued that personality traits could definitely be used to determine leaders from non-leaders. They found that the significant traits were masculinity, intelligence, and dominance (Northouse, 2004). Several years later, in 1991, another trait research study by Kirkpatrick and Locke, determined that leaders were different from non-leaders on traits including, drive, the desire to lead, honesty and integrity, self- confidence, cognitive ability, and knowledge of the business. The researchers believe that these are traits that leaders can be born with and also traits that can be learned (Northouse, 2004).

Trait research leaves us with an extensive list of traits that leaders and non-leaders alike can cultivate and develop to become leaders and more effective leaders. Essential traits that have been found to be central to the trait research studies mentioned above are: intelligence, self- confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004; Zaccaro,

2007).

Similar to trait approach is skills approach which takes a leader-centered perspective on leadership. The skills approach takes the focus off of personality characteristics and places the

16 emphasis on skills and abilities that can be learned and developed. The skills approach took off after a 1955 article by Robert Katz. This approach proposes that leadership is not a set of traits that a person has, but instead leadership is a set of skills that can be developed. In the 1990s more studies were published that argued that effective leadership depended on the leader‟s ability to solve complex problems within an organization resulting in the development of a skills based model of leadership (Northouse, 2004).

Behavior Theories

The behavior theories focus exclusively on the behaviors of a leader. It considers what leaders do and how they act instead of looking at their qualities and traits or their skills. The style approach categorizes behaviors into two types: task behaviors and relationship behaviors. Task behaviors are about goal attainment and helping group members achieve objectives. Relationship behaviors help members develop camaraderie amongst themselves and become comfortable with the situation that they are in (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004).

Some of the first research studies done on the behavior theories were conducted in the late 1940s at Ohio State University. After Stodgill‟s work in 1948 pointed out that there is more to leadership than what traits a person has, the Ohio researchers wanted to investigate how people acted when leading a team or organization. They developed a questionnaire called the

Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (Hemphill & Coons, 1957) that followers completed about their leaders. A revised version of this questionnaire developed by Stodgill in 1963 became the most widely used in research. The Ohio State study found that leader behaviors fell into two general categories: initiating structure, which are task behaviors and consideration, which fall under relationship behaviors (Northouse, 2004).

While the Ohio State studies were being conducted, researchers (Hemphill & Coons,

1957) at the University of Michigan were also doing their own research on leadership behavior.

They identified two types of leadership behaviors as well. The researchers determined one to be employee orientation, which describes the behavior of leaders who have a strong relationship emphasis with followers. Secondly there is production orientation that basically views workers as simply a means to get the work done (Hemphill & Coons, 1957; Northouse, 2004).

The 1950s and 1960s saw researchers from Ohio State and the University of Michigan trying to discover a universal theory of leadership that would explain effective leadership for every situation. They wanted to determine how leaders could best capitalize on both their task and relationship behaviors to have the best impact on followers. The research was inconclusive

(Northouse, 2004).

During the 1960s the Managerial Grid, which is the most well-known model of managerial behavior, was developed. It has now been named the Leadership Grid and was designed in order to explain how leaders help groups and organizations fulfill their purpose through their concern for people and their concern for production. Again, paralleling the task and relationship leadership behaviors mentioned earlier.

Situational Theories

As the 1960s came to an end, the focus on leadership theory research began to concentrate on leadership in different situations. Situational leadership, developed by Hersey and

Blanchard (1969), proposes that different situations need different types of leadership. This means that an effective leader is one who is able to adapt his or her leadership style to what the situation requires. Situational theory separates leadership into two categories: leadership style and development level of subordinates (Northouse, 2004).

The situational leadership style includes both task behaviors and relationship behaviors.

These behaviors are then further categorized into four categories. First is the directing style where the leader focuses on goal attainment. The leader gives instructions on how to achieve selected goals and then carefully supervises followers to ensure that goals are met. Secondly is the coaching approach that focuses on both achieving the goals and the needs of followers. The third is the supporting approach where the leader focuses on goals, but uses supportive behaviors in order to bring out followers‟ skills needed to accomplish the task. This includes listening, giving feedback and asking for input and giving praise. The last style is the delegating approach.

This is a laissez-faire style where leaders offer little support to followers and delegates tasks to them to accomplish without direction (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004).

Contingency Theory. The contingency theory focuses on styles and situations and proposes that in order to understand a leader it is important to understand the situation in which they lead. In this theory, effective leadership is contingent on matching the leader‟s style to the appropriate setting. Fielder (1967) developed this theory by studying and assessing the styles of leaders, the situations in which they worked, and if they were effective leaders or not. In the contingency theory, leadership styles are categorized as task or relationship motivated. Situations are characterized by leader-member relations that refer to the group atmosphere; task structure that refers to how clearly the task is spelled out; and position power which refers to the amount of authority a leader has (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004). The contingency theory provides the framework to allow for effective matching of the leader and the situation.

Path-Goal Theory. In the 1970s, research appeared on how leaders motivate followers to accomplish goals (Evans, 1970; House, 1971; House & Dessler, 1974). This theory places a focus on the relationship between the leader‟s style and the characteristics of the followers and

19 the work setting. The assumption is that followers will be motivated to achieve goals if they think that they can do the work, the outcome will be what they want, and if they believe the payoffs for the work is worthwhile. The challenge to the leader is to choose the best leadership style that will motivate followers to reach their goal (Northouse, 2004).

Path goal theory looks at four different leadership behaviors. First there is directive leadership which characterizes a leader as someone who sets clear guidelines and makes it clear what is expected. Next there is supportive leadership. This behavior characterizes a leader as someone who treats followers like equals and gives them respect. These are the leaders who go out of their way to make things pleasant for followers. The third behavior is participative leadership which refers to a leader who welcomes the ideas and opinions of followers and uses their suggestions in the decision making process. Lastly, is achievement-oriented leadership which refers to a leader who establishes high standards and expectations of followers. Although expectations are high, the leader has confidence that the follower can accomplish the goal. (Bass,

2008; Northouse, 2004).

The path-goal theory also takes into account the characteristics of the follower and the task. By looking at subordinate characteristics researchers are able to determine how leadership behavior will be taken by the follower. Task characteristics are important in the path-goal theory because they determine the motivation needed (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004).

Leader-Member Exchange Theory. The leader member exchange theory (LMX)

(Dansereau, Green, & Haga, 1975; Graen & Cashman, 1975) takes the approach that leadership is a process centered on the interaction between the leader and the follower. In the mid 1970s researchers began to pay attention to the differences that may exist between a leader and his or her followers. LMX places followers in an in-group or an out-group. The in-group allows the

20 leader to get more accomplished in a more effective manner. The in-group followers do more than is required of them according to their job description. They are innovative and look for ways to advance the goals of the group. Leaders reward them with more opportunities and more responsibilities. In-group members also receive more of the leader‟s time and support. Out-group members on the other hand only do what is in their job description. They will not offer to do any more than is required of them. Leaders treat these group members fairly, but do not give them any special attention. Out-group members are given the basic benefits for their job with no extra opportunities or responsibilities. Later research on the leader-member exchange proposes that leaders no longer focus on the differences between in-group and out-group members and treat all followers the same and look for ways to build trust and respect with all of them (Bass, 2008;

Northouse, 2004).

Transformational Leadership

The 1980s marked the emergence of transformational leadership (Bryman, 1992).

Transformational leadership is the process of changing and transforming individuals, both leader and follower. It focuses on emotions, ethics, values, standards, long-term goals and motives. This approach also includes charismatic and visionary leadership. This type of leadership moves followers to achieve more that what is expected of them (Burns, 1978). Burns distinguished between two types of leadership: transactional and transformational. According to Northouse

(2004), Burns determined that transactional leadership focuses on the exchanges that take place between leaders and followers and represents the bulk of leadership models. Transactional leadership does not look at the individual needs of followers. Transactional leaders gain influence because it is in the best interest of the follower to do what the leaders want.

Transformational leadership, on the other hand, is the process when a leader engages with

21 followers in such a way that the connection raises the motivation level and morality of both the leader and the follower. Transformational leadership is effective at developing followers to their fullest potential (Bass, 2008).

As Burn‟s (1978) research on leadership was being published, Robert House was publishing his own theory of charismatic leadership. Charismatic leadership is often used synonymously with transformational leadership. According to Northouse (2004), House proposed that charismatic leaders act in ways that have charismatic effects on followers. He determined that the personality characteristics of a charismatic leader include being dominant, a strong desire to influence others, self-confidence, and a strong sense of one‟s moral values (Bass,

2008).

Along with having specific personality characteristics, charismatic leaders display specific behaviors that include being strong role models, are competent, and articulate ideological goals with moral overtones, have high expectations of followers, and arouse task- relevant motives in their followers. As a result of charismatic leadership, several things happen.

They include follower trust, similarity between the leader‟s and follower‟s beliefs, unquestioning acceptance of the leader, obedience, identification with the leader, emotional involvement with the goals put out by the leader, follower confidence. These results are even more prevalent in stressful situations when followers tend to look to leaders to deliver them from difficulties (Bass,

2008; Northouse, 2004).

According to Northouse (2004), Bass delved further into the research of transformational leadership in the mid 1980s and provided a more expanded and refined version. He extended the work of Burns by placing more attention on the follower‟s needs rather than on the leader‟s needs. He placed transactional and transformational leadership on a single continuum versus

22 considering them as individual elements. He determined that transformational leadership motivates followers to do more that what is expected.

Model of Transformational Leadership. Just as with the other leadership theories, transformational leadership consists of characteristics that leaders display. There are several factors that Bass (2008) used to clarify his model of transformational leadership. These factors include charisma or an idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Charisma or idealized influence describes leaders who act as strong role models for followers and provide followers with a vision and mission. Inspirational motivation describes leaders who communicate high expectations to followers. Intellectual stimulation describes leadership that motivates followers to be innovative, creative and challenge their beliefs and values, the leader‟s, and the organization‟s as well. Individualized consideration describes leaders who act as coaches and advisors who understand the needs of followers while providing a supportive environment (Northouse, 2004).

Transactional leadership, which is managerial in nature, also incorporates two factors of the transformational leadership model to describe its leadership perspective. The first factor is contingent reward which refers to the exchange of follower effort with specified rewards. The second factor is management-by-exception that refers to the corrective criticism and negative feedback and reinforcement that some leadership uses (Bass, 2008; Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999;

Northouse, 2004).

Leithwoods and Jantzi‟s (1999) model of transformational leadership describes it along six leadership dimensions including: “building school vision and goals; providing intellectual stimulation; offering individualized support; symbolizing professional practices and values; demonstrating high performance expectations; and developing structures to foster participation in

23 school decisions” along with the four management dimensions of: “staffing, instructional support, monitoring, school activities, and community focus” (p. 454).

Leadership can be assigned (formal) or it can be emergent (informal). Leadership that is based on a formal position within an organization is known as assigned leadership. Assigned leaders are in positional power in that they were chosen for the leadership role through an interview or selection process. Leadership that comes when an individual is seen by others as an influential member of a group or organization is known as emergent leadership. Emergent leaders have no positional authority but have significant influence on their colleagues because of their expertise and experience (Ackerman & MacKenzie, 2006; Barth, 2001; Danielson, 2007;

Northouse, 2004). Emergent leaders have been characterized as individuals that establish conditions that promote movement of the team toward accomplishing goals and objectives, increase members‟ freedom, and assist in developing a cohesive team (Kickul & Neuman, 2000).

According to Kickul and Neuman (2000), emergent leadership has received considerably less research than that of leaders with assigned authority. Trends in emergent leadership are now, however, beginning to appear and there is now a focus on how certain individuals become emergent leaders in interacting groups. Northouse (2004) determined that there were three traits that were related to leadership emergence and could be used to identify those individuals perceived to be emergent leaders. Individuals who were more dominant, more intelligent, and more confident about their own performance were identified more frequently as leaders by other group members. Other traits used to identify emergent leaders are extraversion, openness to experience, and cognitive ability (Kickul & Neuman, 2000).

Leadership in Education

Transformational leadership recognizes that those not in formal administrative positions have authority and influence. This power is given by followers to those who can inspire others to collective aspirations and have the personal desire to accomplish these goals (Leithwood &

Jantzi, 1999). Distributive leadership is one of the many components of transformational leadership (Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999; Timperley, 2005).

Timperley (2005) suggests that distributed leadership is not the same as simply dividing tasks among different individuals who can perform specific defined roles. Distributed leadership is, however, influence that is exhibited by individuals at all levels rather than just the people at the top (Leithwood et al., 2007). The distribution of leadership is influenced by the willingness of teachers and principals to view their positions differently. Principals may see leadership distribution as weakening their own power. Teachers who already have busy schedules are hesitant to take on additional responsibilities. They entered the field with the expectation of, and a focus on, working with students rather than with other adults (Leithwood et al., 2007). Other influences that affect teachers‟ desire for leadership may include additional resources including time for preparation and participating in a leadership role; recognition and incentives such as rewards and public acknowledgement; and clarity of the leadership role in order to avoid conflict with colleagues (Leithwood et al., 2007).

Leithwood et al. (2007) hypothesized that there are qualities, experiences, and factors that prompts the attribution of leadership to those in non-administrative roles. They suggest that there are ten categories of characteristics associated with non-administrative leaders. These characteristics are: “interpersonal skills, organizational skills, personal qualities, professional

25 qualities, commitment to an initiative, range of undertakings, respect for others‟ cultures, source of good ideas, breadth of experience, and designation as formal leader” (p.59).

Teacher Leadership

Teacher leadership is not a new phenomenon, but existed in the mid-nineteenth century when teachers were seen as public leaders (Lanier & Sedlack, 1989). Leadership at this time was viewed as being appropriate for men only. When women began to enter teaching as a profession, they were not accepted as leaders (Vail, 1991).

Many teachers continue to believe that teaching and leadership are mutually exclusive.

According to Barth (2001), many teachers see themselves exclusively as teachers and believe that leadership is the responsibility of the principal or administration. These teachers fail to acknowledge the capacity that they have to lead their schools in school improvement. Ackerman and Mackenzie (2006) determined that teacher leadership competes with not only this traditional view that teachers are not leaders, but also it competes with schools that continue to be uncomfortable with the idea of teachers as leaders.

Research suggests that it is the responsibility of teacher leaders to ensure that reform and improvement take root in the classroom, because it is the teachers with the ability to establish improvements in teaching and student achievement at the classroom level (Berry, Johnson &

Montgomery, 2005; Harris, 2002; Phelps, 2008; Tewel, 1994). Many principals support and even nurture this characteristic of teacher leadership (Ackerman & Mackenzie, 2006; Barth 2001;

Donaldson, 2007). In the early 1980s A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform

(1983) ignited national, state, and local school reform efforts after it reported that the educational foundations of society was being eroded by mediocrity and put out the call for the urgent need for immediate improvement. Along with recommendations in the areas of content, standards and

26 expectations, time, and leadership and fiscal support, the report recommended the improvement of teachers. The report specifically focused on teacher leadership by recommending that master teachers assist in the designing of teacher preparation programs and be involved in supervising new teachers.

Teacher leadership can be a formal or informal role (Ackerman & MacKenzie, 2006).

Formal leaders are in positional power in that they were chosen for the leadership role through a selection process. These leaders may have positions such as department chair, instructional coach, or master teacher. Informal leaders have no positional authority but have significant influence on their colleagues because of their expertise and experience (Barth, 2001; Danielson,

2007). Vail (1991) organized teacher leadership into seven types that exist within the formal and informal roles of teacher leadership. Educational leadership concerns the administration, operation, and management of schools. Instructional leadership is the creation and implementation of school‟s instructional program. Organizational leadership is the communication, decision making, and morale of teachers and administrators. Supervisory leadership is focused on improving the teaching-learning process. Administrative leadership deals with policy and procedures. Community leadership is concerned with a teacher‟s community participation as activists who promote learning. Lastly, political leadership is the engagement in political activities on a local, state, or national level that assists in making and enforcing policy.

Silva, Gimbert, and Nolan (2000) performed an exploratory study, employing a descriptive case study methodology that looked at teacher leadership. The researchers interviewed three (3) teacher leaders who lead from within the classroom on behalf of students.

The purpose of the study was to gain rich and meaningful insights into the work of teacher

27 leaders. They specifically sought to capture what teacher leadership is from within the classroom and how these teachers experience teacher leadership. There were five assertions drawn from the three teachers‟ stories. They found that teacher leaders navigate the structures of the schools, nurture relationships, encourage professional growth, help others with change, and challenge the status quo.

Galland‟s (2008) dissertation research surveyed 158 teachers enrolled in a state-wide professional development program for teacher leaders in one Midwestern state. The research sought to analyze the relationship between effective teacher leaders and the school structures in which they were leaders. The research concluded that role clarity had the highest correlation and was found to be the most predictive of teacher leader effectiveness.

Roby (2009) surveyed 107 K-12 teachers in Ohio pursuing graduate degrees in teacher leadership at Wright State University in order to gain information on the teacher leadership attribute of communication. This research study focused on public speaking development through an analysis of speaking anxiety of teachers and sought to gain insight on the communication as a teacher leadership skill. The research found that teachers who are recognized as leaders should ideally possess low communication apprehension. Study participants developed a development plan to address any communication weaknesses because being able to speak fluently and without anxiety to parents, administrators, and students is a leadership skill and quality that is worth pursuing according to the researchers.

These above studies concluded that effective teacher leaders must first be able to navigate the school structures in which they are leaders. They should have clarity and understanding of the roles in which they lead, whether leading from within the classroom on behalf of students or leading their colleagues, in a formal or informal leadership role. The effective teacher leader

28 should also exhibit various characteristics such as clear communication, ability to nurture relationships, encourage professional growth, help others with change, and challenge the status quo.

Leadership and Career and Technical Education (CTE)

The National Center for Research in Vocational Education (NCRVE) was developed to provide leadership development to career and technical education educators. After an extensive literature review the NCRVE developed a conceptualization of leadership that reflects the trait theory, behavioral theory, situational theory, contingency theory, and transformational leadership models. Moss (1994) suggests that while researchers agree that transactional and transformational behaviors are both needed in leadership, leaders who perform more transformational leadership behaviors have a more positive impact on the team and their satisfaction with the leader. According to Wonacott (2001), the definition of leadership for CTE continues to reflect a transformational model.

The NCRVE first defined leadership as both a process and a property. Leadership is a process in that it is the use of non-coercive influence of a group to accomplish objectives. It is defined as a property in that leadership is given to an individual by group members when they perceive the individual possesses certain characteristics or attributes. Second, the NCRVE recognized that those who are perceived as leaders have power that has been voluntarily given by followers. Third, anyone can be considered a leader regardless of the position that he or she may hold and the center specifies that there must be leaders in all professional roles in order for the vocational educational system to reach its potential (Finch, 1991; Moss & Johansen, 1991; Moss,

1994).

Moss and Johansen (1991) developed six leader tasks of vocational education leaders that serve as criteria to measure a leader‟s performance. The tasks are: inspires a shared vision and establishes standards that help the organization achieve its next stage of development; fosters unity, collaboration and ownership, and recognizes individual and team contributions; exercises power effectively and empowers others to act; exerts influence outside of the organization in order to set the right context for the organization; establishes an environment conducive to learning; and satisfies the job-related needs of members of the organization as individuals. These tasks are achieved through transformational leadership behaviors that are determined by the individual‟s leadership attributes or characteristics (Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Moss & Johansen,

1991; Moss & Liang, 1991; Moss & Jensrud, 1996).

Moss and Johansen (1991) developed a leadership attributes inventory to assess 37 attributes or characteristics, knowledge, values, and skills an individual has that predispose them to successful transactional and transformational leadership and shape a leader‟s behavior

(Dubinsky, Yammarino & Jolson, 1995; Moss & Jensrud, 1996). These attributes were compiled from a review of literature. The research sought to determine what leadership attributes, as demonstrated by behavior was reflective of a successful CTE leader and could determine an individual‟s tendency to perform certain behaviors that can improve and transform an organization (Liang, Chiou, & Liou, 2001; Moss & Jensrud, 1996; Moss & Johansen, 1991).

Moss and Liang (1991) concluded that CTE is facing rapid and significant changes in the nature of work, the ethnic and cultural composition of society, and increasing demands on the education system. Career and technical education is also being challenged to justify its place in the education system, when the system is being required to provide more basic skills training,

30 more critical thinking preparation, more science and math knowledge and higher levels of sophistication in all academic subjects.

Career and technical education is in need of its own transformation in order to adjust to the rapid changes in society and in order to anticipate future changes. Moss and Liang (1991) declared that what CTE needs is strong leadership at all levels. There is a need for strong leadership in delivering CTE to young and adult students and strong leadership for professional associations. The National Leadership Institute was created in 2001 with the purpose of developing leadership in CTE program educators. According to Gregson and Allen (2007), members of the institute identified a lack of new leaders to fill future needs as one of the overriding issues facing career and technical education. Career and technical education must have leaders at all levels and in all professional roles in order to achieve peak efficiency (Moss,

1994).

In order to gain the strong leadership needed in CTE programs, Moss and Liang (1991) proposes that there has to be an assessment of existing attributes, an identification of attributes that might be strengthened and other appropriate leadership development. There has to be deliberate educational interventions in order to develop leadership attributes. This development of leadership attributes has to cause CTE program educators to begin to recognize opportunities to emerge as leaders, take advantage of these opportunities and succeed as leaders in various situations and professional roles.

According to Vail and Pedras (1994), developing the capacity of leadership among teachers is one way to prepare the career and technical education field to meet the challenge of improving student achievement, because it is impossible to improve performance without promoting leadership in education by teachers. The latest research found targeting career and

31 technical education teachers took place in the early 1990s. This research looked at the predictors of leadership behaviors and found that career and technical education teachers are more involved in teacher leadership than non-career and technical education teachers (Vail, 1991). Vail and

Pedras (1994) added to the research on career and technical education teacher leadership by performing an ex post facto/correlational study of 84 trade and industry teachers. The purpose of the study was to provide information on the extent to which trade and industry teachers performed teacher leadership behaviors and to identify predictors of teacher leadership behaviors. The researchers found that although the teachers believed that teacher leadership performance was important, they themselves seldom performed teacher leadership. The research also concluded that the importance placed on teacher leadership was the best predictor of teacher leadership performance with marital status following.

Women in Leadership

The barrier of slow advancement of women leaders into top positions is often characterized as a glass ceiling. Terms such as concrete wall and sticky floor are used to identify the barriers posed by the combination of racism and sexism faced by women of color. Eagly and

Carli (2007) identifies the term „labyrinth‟ to describe the upward mobility of women. This term embodies the diverse challenges and complex paths women face as they progress into leadership positions while confronting the barriers of sexism, racism, identity discrimination, and childcare needs.

The labyrinth can be successfully negotiated by demonstrating the combination of assertiveness and the qualities of helpfulness, kindness, and niceness (Sanchez-Hucles & Davis,

2010). Women leaders are also expected to create social capital by establishing positive interactions and relationships with colleagues, networking, and creating mentoring relationships

32 in order to be successful. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) believe that once women reach the pinnacle of leadership positions, barriers still remain. Haslan and Ryan (2008) asserts that women, especially women of color, find themselves dealing with high risk situations while being more isolated than men in challenging situations. They lack a support network and mentors, and are less able to get needed help.

Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) points to an existing gender bias that has men associated with leadership because they show more masculine traits that are identified with leadership, such as assertiveness, and dominance, whereas women are perceived less as leaders because of the likeliness of showing qualities such as compassion. Oakley (2000), however, cites research‟s confirmation that female leadership styles resulted in positive outcomes for organizations in terms of communication, structure, negotiations, and authority.

Women also face stereotyping as a significant barrier to the quest for advanced leadership roles. Women are expected to be less effective leaders. When female stereotypes intersect with race, it leads to a combination of racial and sexual stereotyping, and token status (Sanchez-

Hucles & Davis, 2010).

Eagly and Johnson (1990) performed a meta-analysis of organizational studies with 289 participants, laboratory experiments with 25 participants, assessment studies of 56 participants and a questionnaire study of 306 participants. The purpose of the research was to find gender relevant aspects of leadership roles. The researchers concluded that 92% of the included studies showed that women tend to adopt a more participative style and a less directive style than their male counterparts did.

Burns and Martin (2010) performed both a survey and interview of 14 principals and 164 teachers employed in Missouri public schools. The goal was to examine the effectiveness of

33 female and male educational leaders who used the invitational leadership styles in their school.

The data suggested that in order for schools to be considered effective they had to have leaders who were perceived to demonstrate consistently higher invitational leadership attributes than schools considered to be less effective. Principals were found to view trust as the most influential factor while teachers believed respect was the predominant factor.

Dunbar and Kinnersley (2011) performed a survey study of 239 female administrators from Tennessee higher education institutions in order to determine the differences in perceptions of the effectiveness of the mentoring relationship among female higher-education administrators who experienced different mentoring approaches. This review specifically looked at the research question posed by the researchers of what the perceptions of female administrators in higher education regarding how mentoring helped to prepare them for leadership. The study found that

64% of respondents had had a mentor. The respondents were 88% Caucasian and 90% of them had been in a mentoring relationship with a Caucasian mentor. Ninety percent of mentors were of a higher rank than the mentee and 82% worked at the same institution. The female administrators indicate that their mentoring relationships prepared them for leadership and recommended a mentor as a tool for advancement.

In the second part of a longitudinal study that began in 2007, Knopik and Moerer (2010) surveyed 27 women from five states, but also let them explain answers in their own words. They sought to determine how women entrepreneurs and women leaders viewed teamwork, demonstrated personal traits, made team choices, defined vision, and described motivations and priorities of purpose. The researchers found that the entrepreneurs were much more task- oriented and focused on their own actions. The leaders tended to value teamwork, collaboration, relationship building and maintaining those relationships.

According to Coleman (2005), gender equity issues are still present among secondary school principals. Although these issues exist, Coleman (2005) posits that a focus on women has changed to a new focus on gender. This change in focus has taken the attention away from problems for women in leadership, but there is a clear evidence of the gap in terms of leadership roles of men and women. Most secondary principals are men, while most teachers are women.

Coleman (2005) suggests that this is due to discrimination with preferences of mentoring and career opportunities being given to men.

Loder and Spillane (2005) compared 16 women administrators (10 principals and 6 assistant principals) who were 1-5 years into their positions. In their study the researchers interviewed the women to find how they viewed the relationship between their current role and their former role as teachers. The study resulted in the women administrators revealing that in their transition from teaching to a managerial position they faced role conflicts. They admitted to a naiveté about how schools operated. Their focus on managerial tasks often hindered their focus on instructional issues. Once they became administrators they were no longer viewed as colleagues or friends by other teachers.

In an effort to illuminate differences and commonalities of women leaders from different ethnic backgrounds through their own voices and create a vision of what leadership is like at the secondary level, Wrushen and Sherman (2008) interviewed eight (8) female secondary principals. While the researchers also asked questions about personal backgrounds, early influence, personal and professional balance, power and feminist post-structured; this study centered on the researchers focus on gender and leadership, ethnicity and leadership, and power.

In terms of gender and leadership, all of the women spoke of leadership using terms such as

“emotional” and “compassionate” which they believed allows them to be more effective leaders.

Also, the women were aware of perceptions that society had on leaders with two specifying their youth affecting how others perceived them. The women spoke of not being heard as women leaders and had to spend years working to gain respect that was automatically given to their male counterparts. The women spoke of ethnicity and leadership by stating that racial stereotyping stands out over gender. Some of the women of color felt that they were “paving the way” for other females and felt the pressure that it put on them and whether or not their actions would open the door for others. The women, however, looked forward to paying it forward. When asked about power the women did not feel powerful and felt uncomfortable describing themselves as powerful. They are aware that they underutilize their power and influence to advocate on behalf of their teachers and students.

The previous studies concluded that women were more participative and less directive in their leadership style than their male counterparts. They tended to value teamwork, collaboration, relationship building and maintaining those relationships. Females believe that they are effective leaders because they are emotional and compassionate, but they feel that they have to spend years working to gain respect that‟s automatically given to their male counterparts.

Once becoming administrators they feel they are no longer viewed as colleagues or friends by other teachers. Women administrators admitted to facing role conflicts in their transition from teaching to managerial positions and they do not feel powerful in those positions. They are aware that they underutilize their power and influence, in these positions, to advocate on behalf of their teachers and students.

Leadership Attributes, Professional and Personal Characteristics

It was important for the researcher to gain an understanding of the leadership attributes, professional characteristics and personal characteristics of female secondary teachers. This

36 information was used to establish if there was a relationship between leadership attributes and professional characteristics and leadership attributes and personal characteristics.

Leadership Attributes

Traits/Attributes. Leadership attributes or characteristics play an integral role in the different leadership approaches. In the trait approach, leadership attributes were initially thought to be universal and they alone were what differentiated leaders from followers. The identified group of traits was: intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self- confidence, and sociability. As the trait approach evolved into a more balanced perspective that determined leadership was both personality and situational factors, another set of traits or attributes were identified. These 10 attributes are: achievement, persistence, insight, self- confidence, responsibility, cooperativeness, tolerance, influence, and sociability. As more research on traits was conducted, other traits stood out as the essential attributes of a leader including intelligence, masculinity, dominance, drive, motivation, integrity, confidence, cognitive ability, and task knowledge. The major traits or attributes that were common in all of the major research studies were intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability (Bass, 2008; Northouse, 2004).

Skills Attributes. While the skills approach focused on the skills or capabilities of a leader, there were still individual characteristics that had influences on their leadership performance. The attributes essential in the skills approach have been determined to help as leaders apply their leadership competencies. The attributes are listed as cognitive skills or intelligence due to biology and not a person‟s experience; crystallized cognitive ability is intellectual ability that is acquired and learned over time from a person‟s experiences; motivation, and personality (Northouse, 2004).

Behaviors and Situational Attributes. As leadership theories progressed into the behavioral, situational, and contingency leadership approaches, attributes were not of particular interest to the researchers. The focus was on identification and description of behaviors and situations of the leader, not on personality attributes of the leader. The path-goal approach took a look at follower and task attributes, but not the attributes of leaders. The leader-member exchange focused on the interactions between the leader and followers and not the attributes that the leader has.

Transformational Attributes. In the transformational leadership approach leader attributes were again in focus. The attributes are: confidence, strong values, competence, articulate, good listeners, and self-determined. In the charismatic approach, which in most research is synonymous with transformational leadership, leadership attributes were found to be charisma, dominance, desire to influence, confidence and strong values (Bass, 2008; Northouse,

2004).

As the leadership approaches evolved from leader focused theories, such as the trait theory, to transformational leadership that focuses on the process of changing and transforming individuals; new essential traits that leaders needed to be effective were determined. These traits affected not only the leader but the follower as well and included characteristics that fall into seven major areas: emotional coping which includes self-confidence, self-control, ability to handle conflict, determination and tolerance for stress; behavioral coping that includes persistence, flexibility, adaptability, belief in one‟s own competence, and a visionary and entrepreneurial spirit; abstract orientation which includes analytical, exercise appropriate judgment, decision-making and problem-solving skills, and logical; risk taking includes willingness to take risks and introduce new challenges and projects; innovation including

38 creativity and challenging the status quo; humor which includes sense of humor and the ability to laugh; and lastly is experience which includes educational level, maturity, and being able to adapt (Dubinsky, Yammarino & Jolson, 1995).

Modern Trait Attributes 1990s. In the last few years, a modern trait leadership perspective has emerged that offers a focus not only on multiple personal attributes but also on how the attributes work together to influence performance. Zacarro (2007) lists the traits of the modern approach to trait leadership as: intelligence, creativity, cognitive complexity, adaptability, extroversion, risk propensity, openness, social and emotional intelligence, persuasion, negotiation skills, problem solving skills, need for socialized power, need for achievement, and motivation to lead. These attributes can be categorized into sets of leadership attributes including cognitive capacities, personality or dispositional qualities, motive and values, problem-solving skills, social capabilities, and tacit knowledge.

The term “leadership traits” is used interchangeably in the literature with the terms: leadership styles, leadership behaviors, leadership qualities, leadership skills or characteristics, personal skills or characteristics, professional skills or characteristics, and personal qualities

(Avolio & Bass, 1999; Bass, 2008; Den Hartog et al., 1999; Jago, 1982; Moss, 1994; van Eeden,

Cilliers, & van Deventer, 2008).

The literature has provided exhaustive lists of leadership attributes to describe what makes an effective leader. In the early 1990s the National Center for Research on Vocational

Education (NCRVE) put forth its own 37 leadership attributes that predispose a leader to successful performance in CTE (Moss & Johansen, 1991). Leadership attributes as defined by

Moss and Johansen (1991) are characteristics, knowledge, skills, and values that predispose a teacher to successful performance as a leader in career and technical education. These leadership

39 attributes are further organized into five factors or clusters that include drive, organization, trust, tolerance, and interpersonal characteristics (Jensrud, 1995). The rationale given for the use of these 37 attributes is that the authors (Moss & Johansen, 1991) posits that there are some attributes that will increase the likelihood that desirable leadership behaviors will occur in different situations.

Professional Characteristics

Throughout the literature on leadership, professional characteristics have meant different things to different researchers. For some researchers, professional characteristics are a list of qualities that resemble personal characteristics and leadership attributes. These researchers determine professional characteristics to include: communication, visionary, risk-takers, adaptable, work ethic, and influence (Ackerman & MacKenzie, 2006; Bass, 2008).

Krishnaveni and Anitha (2007) defined professional characteristics, in their study of educators, as subject knowledge, teaching prowess, updating knowledge, collegiality, commitment, teacher student relationship, empowerment, self-development, remuneration, and ethical code of conduct. The researchers identified these characteristics because they determined, after an extensive review of literature, that the adaptation and practice of them will help to establish the teaching profession to its‟ highest standards.

In Lieberman, Saxl, and Miles‟ (1988) research on teacher leadership listed characteristics as skills, abilities, experiences, involvement in curriculum development, teaching new curriculum to others, academic pursuits and accomplishments, holding positions where they gained experience in administrative and organizational skills, knowledgeable of community concerns and schools, risk takers, school climate, and interpersonal skills. The researchers

40 determined that the knowledge of these characteristics provided the opportunity for the identification and development of future leaders.

Vail and Pedras (1994) determined that other professional characteristics that may be found to influence the emergence of teacher leadership were the type of school, current assignment, location of the school, availability of a teacher aide, years of teaching experience, size of the school, number of additional roles, subject matter taught, and organization involvement. The researcher felt that in preparing teachers for leadership roles, it is necessary to examine the circumstances in which teacher leadership has thrived.

The previous studies determined that the knowledge, adaptation and practice of certain characteristics such as subject knowledge, academic pursuits and accomplishments, holding positions where they gained experience in administrative and organizational skills, provided the opportunity for the identification and development of future leaders and will help to establish the teaching profession to its‟ highest standards. It was also found that in preparing teachers for leadership roles, it is necessary to examine characteristics such as subject taught, location of school, and years of teaching that may influence the emergence of teacher leadership and the circumstances in which it has thrived.

Personal Characteristics

Throughout the literature on leadership, the term “personal characteristics” has been used interchangeably with the terms personality characteristics, personality traits, personal demographics, personal qualities, personal traits, and personal identity. Each of these terms has at times defined the same traits and at times the terms differ on the traits they are representing.

The literature has shown personal characteristics to be identified as communication, teamwork, leadership, interpersonal and technical skills, work ethic, honesty, flexibility, and motivation

(Bass, 2008; Eeden, Cilliers, & Deventer, 2008; Ricketts & Rudd, 2002). In their study of personal characteristics and transformational leadership, Dubinsky, Yammarino and Jolson

(1995) listed personal characteristics under seven major areas consisting of emotional coping, behavioral coping, abstract orientation, risk taking, innovation, use of humor, and experience.

Emotional coping is the degree to which people believe in themselves, their beliefs, opinions and abilities. The personal characteristics listed are self-confidence, inner strength, determination, and ability to handle conflict and tolerate stress. Behavioral coping is the degree to which someone is optimistic about life. This type of coping includes the characteristics of persistence, flexibility, adaptability, belief in one‟s competence, and an entrepreneurial and visionary spirit.

Abstract orientation is the level of an individual‟s ability to assess and evaluate ideas. This area includes the characteristics of being analytical, judgment, decision making, and problem solving skills. Risk taking is the level to which an individual assumes risk. This area includes the characteristics of persuasiveness, influence, risk taking, trust, and introducing new projects and challenges. Innovation is the level to which one is willing to try new things. This area includes the characteristics of creativity, challenging the status quo, originality, ingenuity, and resourcefulness. Use of humor is the level to which one invokes a jovial atmosphere. This area includes the characteristics of wit and humor. Lastly is the area of experience. The characteristics included in this area are personal and work experiences such as maturity, job tenure and educational level. The authors‟ rationale for using these personal characteristics is to identify key personal characteristics of successful managers who are transformational leaders. Once identified with these characteristics individuals can then be recruited and/or training programs can be developed to enhance the characteristics.

Bennis and Nanus (1985) propose that all people have the potential for leadership.

Leadership can be assigned or emergent. An assigned position is one in which an individual is in positional power in that they were chosen for the role through an interview or selection process

(Ackerman & MacKenzie, 2006; Northouse, 2004).

When an individual seeks out an assigned position it is important to know what employers are seeking in an employee, especially in difficult economic times such as the present economic recession. Ricketts and Rudd (2002) determined that the characteristics most desired by employers of new hires are communication skills, motivation/initiative, teamwork skills, leadership skills, academic achievement, interpersonal skills, flexibility/adaptability, technical skills, honesty/integrity, work ethic, and analytical/problem-solving skills. These characteristics are considered important because the employer sees the person as someone who is valuable and can make a difference to the team and help the company stay profitable. These characteristics separate the top performers from others on the team.

In their study on the longevity in teaching of agriculture teachers, Edwards and Briers

(2001) chose to look at personal, professional, and situational characteristics. The personal characteristics that they chose were demographic in nature. They chose to investigate using the personal characteristics of gender and highest degree obtained, along with other professional and situational characteristics. The rationale behind their choice is to gain a personal and professional understanding of the teacher, know the fundamentals of the teachers‟ work setting, and gain insight into their professional future. The authors determined that this was necessary in order to provide help to those who advise pre-service students, work with induction programs, in-service education, and teacher retention.

In her research on the predictors of leadership behaviors, Vail (1994) lists personal characteristics as gender, marital status, education race, age, and number of children. The rationale behind the use of these characteristics is to identify predictors of the emergence of leadership behaviors that could be used by teacher educators in pre-service and in-service programs. The information can also be used by supervisors and administrators to provide and strengthen opportunities for teachers to lead.

In Vail and Pedras‟ (1994) correlational study of 84 trade and industry teachers, they examined teacher leadership performances as accounted by personal characteristics, professional characteristics, school health, and teacher leadership. The instrumentation was designed to reflect which characteristics were predictors of teacher leadership behaviors. The researchers found that the prevalent characteristics of trade and industry teachers were 87% male, 93% white, average age of 44 and married with children. The teachers had taught an average of 18 years at schools that were evenly distributed in urban, suburban, and rural areas. The researchers found that

63.1% of the teachers led vocational student organizations, 25% were head coaches, 5% were assistant coaches, 9.5% were class sponsors, and 9.5% were school committee members. There were 76% who participated in professional trade and industry organizations, 73% participated in general education organizations, and 55% in organizations unrelated to school. When trade and industry teachers believe the leadership behavior is important, they are more likely to be moved to action. Age and years of teaching experience were not found to predict teacher leadership.

Vail (1991) examined 370 non-vocational teachers and 373 vocational teachers to determine whether certain characteristics and experiences explain the type of leadership behaviors teachers perform and the extent teachers performed those behaviors. While the study included both non-vocational and vocational teachers, this study will look at the vocational

44 teachers only. The subject areas of the vocational teachers included agriculture (5.4%), business education (35.1%), health (.8%), home economics (23.9%), marketing (7.2%), trade and industry

(21.2%), other (5.3%) and no response (1.1%). The personal characteristics that Vail found to be relevant were gender, age, race, and education. The professional characteristics found to be relevant were years teaching, where one teaches, and current leadership.

McElvey‟s (1993) research sought to determine how the presidents of technical institutes in Georgia viewed their leadership attributes and how selected faculty at those institutes viewed the leadership attributes of their presidents. Using the 37 item self rating form of the Leader

Attributes Inventory survey instrument the rating scale was adjusted from “very undescriptive, undescriptive, somewhat undescriptive, somewhat descriptive, descriptive, very descriptive” to

“40% or less – about 40% or less of the time this is an accurate description of me, 50% - about

50% of the time this is an accurate description of me, 60% - about 60% of the time this is an accurate description of me, 70% - about 70% of the time this is an accurate description of me,

80% - about 80% of the time this is an accurate description of me, 90% - about 90% of the time this is an accurate description of me, and 100% - about 100% of the time this is an accurate description of me. The researcher found that the presidents of the technical institutes rated themselves highly on 14 of the 37 attributes.

McElvey‟s (1993) research described certain personal and professional demographics or characteristics of the participants. Those characteristics are age, education, gender, ethnicity, school size, years of teaching experience, years in vocational education administration, years in present position, and years of business/industry work experience.

In a survey of 143 vocational department heads in technical colleges, community colleges, and high schools, Jensrud (1995) examined the relationships between leader gender,

45 rater gender and leader effectiveness and attribute ratings using the Leader Attributes Inventory

(LAI) and the Leader Effectiveness Inventory (LEI). Of the 37 possible significant differences on the LAI, 17 attributes, 46%, showed significant differences. In all 17 areas, female leaders were rated higher than male leaders. Over 50% (55%) of the “Drive” attributes were significant, 33% of the “Organization” attributes were significant, 71% of “Trust” attributes were found to be significant, 50% of the “Interpersonal” attributes were significant, and 17% of the “Tolerance” attributes were significant.

According to the above studies, personal characteristics that were demographic in nature were used to identify predictors of the emergence of leadership, to gain an understanding of the teacher, know the fundamentals of the teachers‟ work setting, and gain insight into their professional future. The personal characteristics studied included gender, marital status, education, race, and age.

CHAPTER 3

METHOD

This chapter begins by providing the purpose of the study and research questions. The remainder of the chapter describes the method used in this study and was organized into the following sections: (a) research design, (b) participants, (c) instrumentation, (d) procedure, and

(e) data analysis.

Purpose and Research Questions

The purpose of this survey study was to examine the relationship between the dependent variable (leadership attributes clusters) and the two independent variables (professional characteristics and personal characteristics) of secondary female teachers in career and technical education (CTE) programs. The CTE program areas for teachers included in this study are agriculture, business, engineering and technology, family and consumer sciences, healthcare science, and marketing. This research was guided by three research questions. The research questions are following.

1. What are the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience,

educational level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future

leadership position

c. Personal characteristics included: race and age

2. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and the professional

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience, educational

level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership

position

3. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and personal characteristics of

secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Personal characteristics included: race and age

Research Design

The research design for this study was correlation. The advantage of a correlation study is that it is the most appropriate for allowing the researcher to determine the single or combined relationship between multiple independent variables at the same time (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2007;

Huberty & Petoskey, 1999), which is the case in this study. A disadvantage of a correlational study is that it is limited in its ability to establish causal inference between the variables (Gall et al., 2007). For example, a teacher‟s leadership attributes may be related to independent variables that are not included in this study (Gall et al., 2007). The analysis will allow the researcher to examine in combination, whether the independent variables of professional characteristics and

48 personal characteristics are related to and to what degree, the dependent variables of leadership attributes of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia.

A web-based survey method was used to conduct this study. According to Muijs (2004), survey research is the most popular method of quantitative research design in social science research. A survey is a basic method of gathering information and can be administered by pencil- and-paper questionnaires, face-to-face interviews, telephone, web-based or e-mail form (Muijs,

2004). Information gathered from surveys is highly flexible and can generalize from a sample to a population. Surveys are frequently used in educational research and allow for many sets of data to be investigated (Gall et al., 2007). The web-based survey design has several advantages. Web- based surveys are cost effective because of the elimination of postal fees associated with mailed surveys and there is quick availability of data for collection. There is also anonymity of participants which leads to more realistic answers and web-based surveys eliminate the need for the manual transfer of data from the survey into an electronic format (Gall et al., 2007).

There are also disadvantages associated with web-based surveys. There is the threat of multiple submissions from the same respondent. Another disadvantage is that each individual in the sample must have access to the internet during the time frame of the survey. Lastly, is the possibility that someone not in the sample submits a completed survey (Gall et al., 2007)? This study used the web-based survey method due to its cost-effectiveness and the researcher‟s ability to gain data quickly. The survey was delivered and data collected using the web-based platform of Survey Monkey.

Participants

The target population is the entire group that the researcher wants to learn about (Gall et al., 2007). For this study, the target population consisted of 1752 female secondary CTE

49 teachers who were employed in public Georgia high schools during the 2010-2011 school year.

The accessible population, also known as the study population is a subset of the target population

(Gall et al., 2007), and is where the researcher drew the sample. The accessible population for this study was approximately 1197 female secondary CTE teachers with valid e-mail accounts available to the public through their school‟s website. From this accessible population, a smaller group known as a sample (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006), was selected.

A comprehensive list of career and technical education (CTE) teachers was received from the Georgia Department of Education (GDOE) that included a list of schools, addresses, and telephone numbers. This list reflected teachers employed for the 2010-2011 school year. The

GDOE identified 1752 female secondary CTE teachers in the program areas of agriculture, business, engineering and technology education, family and consumer sciences, healthcare education, and marketing. Based on Krejcie and Morgan‟s (1970) sample size table, a sample size of 291 was established for this population. Fraenkel and Wallen (1990) posit that the larger the sample, the more likely it represents the population from which it was taken. Huck (2008) posits that it is not atypical for a researcher to increase the initial sample size to compensate for anticipated low survey completion and returns. According to Gall et al. (2007), it is recommended to use the largest sample possible especially if the expected difference between the groups is small. The sample size for this study was doubled since it is expected that CTE teachers share similarities and the differences are expected to be small. Therefore, the researcher invited 582 possible participants for this study. The sample for this study was selected using a simple random method by assigning each teacher in the accessible population a number and then utilizing an online random number selector (Stattrek, 2011) to determine which teachers to invite to participate in the study. After two individuals opted out and 19 others had e-mails that

50 bounced out of the e-mail queue and were deemed to not be accessible, there were a total of 561 possible participants in this study. Of the 561 possible participants, 179 responded, representing a response rate of 32%.

The sample of teachers represented career and technical education (CTE) program areas at the secondary level which are organized and delivered around career pathways (Scott & Sarkees-

Wircenski, 2004). A career pathway is a coherent, articulated sequence of rigorous academic and career/technical courses, commencing in the ninth grade and leading to an associate degree, baccalaureate degree and beyond, an industry recognized certificate, and/or licensure (Center for

Occupational Research and Development [CORD], 2010). The concept of career pathways is rooted in strengthening the education of all students and the career planning process; the desired outcomes are greater student achievement and preparation for the workforce (ranging from entry level to professional) or postsecondary education. Career pathways in CTE are designed to allow students to mold their learning toward a specific career focus (Georgia Department of Education,

2006a). The career pathways and teachers associated with them in the program areas are identified in the following paragraphs.

Agriculture teachers provide students with the knowledge, technical skills and leadership training that they need in order to move into real world practical jobs. There were 391 high school agriculture teachers in 2010 who prepared students for agriscience, plant science/horticulture, forestry/natural resources, agribusiness management, agricultural mechanics, veterinary science, and animal science pathways (GADOE, 2010). Approximately,

7.2% of Georgia CTE students enrolled in the agriculture program area in 2010 with males representing 64% of enrolled agriculture students and females representing 36%. The latest

51 national data showed that in 2005 1.1% of high school teachers were agriculture teachers (US

DOE, 2011).

Business and computer science teachers prepared students for the business world by developing their knowledge, employability and technical skills. There were 1806 Georgia high school business and computer science teachers in 2010 who prepared students for administrative/information support, financial management – accounting, financial management – services, or small business development career pathways (GA Dept. of Ed., 2010; Scott &

Sarkees-Wircenski, 2004). At least a third, 33.6%, of Georgia CTE students enrolled in the business and computer science program area in 2010 with males making up 52% of enrolled business and computer science students and females making up 48%. The latest national data showed that in 2005, there 2.1% of high school teachers were business and computer science teachers (US DOE, 2011).

Engineering and technology teachers prepared students for challenging engineering and technology programs at the post-secondary level. There were 482 Georgia high school engineering and technology teachers that prepared students for career pathways in electronics, energy systems, engineering, engineering graphics and design, and manufacturing (GA Dept. of

Ed. 2010). These teachers taught the 7.4% of Georgia CTE students enrolled in engineering and technology area in 2010 by utilizing both classroom and laboratory experiences. Males represented 79% of enrolled students in engineering and technology while females represented

21%. The latest national data showed that in 2005, of the total number of U.S. teachers there were 0.9% high school engineering and technology teachers around the nation (US DOE, 2011).

Family and consumer sciences education teachers focus on families, work, and their interrelationships in the areas of nutrition, food science, and fashion or interior design. There

52 were 778 Georgia high school family and consumer sciences education teachers who prepared students for consumer services, family, community & global leadership, interior design, nutrition and food science, culinary arts, early childhood education, and teaching as a profession career pathways (GA Dept. of Ed., 2010; Scott & Sarkees-Wircenski, 2004). They taught students how to manage resources in order to meet the essential needs of individuals and families across the life span. There were 23.8% of Georgia CTE students enrolled in the family and consumer sciences program area in 2010 including culinary arts and education. Males made up 23% of enrolled students and females made up 77%. The latest national data showed that in 2005, 2.9% of high school teachers were family and consumer sciences teachers (US DOE, 2011).

Healthcare science education teachers make up an additional area of CTE. These teachers assisted students in learning the basic concepts of health and wellness, medical terminology, and the ethical and legal responsibilities of healthcare providers. There were 359 Georgia high school healthcare science teachers who prepared students for biotechnology research & development, diagnostic services, health information, therapeutic services-emergency services, therapeutic services-medical services, therapeutic services-nursing, personal care services-cosmetology, and physical medicine career pathways (GA Dept. of Ed., 2010; Scott & Sarkees-Wircenski, 2004).

There were 6.6% of Georgia CTE students enrolled in the healthcare science area in 2010.

Males made up 18% while females made up 82% of healthcare class enrollment. The latest national data showed that in 2005, 0.4% of high school teachers were healthcare teachers (US

DOE, 2011).

Finally, the last area of CTE is marketing education. The 150 Georgia high school marketing, sales, and services teachers ensure that students gain an understanding of and learn how to apply principles of marketing, management and entrepreneurship; make sound economic

53 decisions and display social responsibility in today‟s global economy. Marketing teachers prepare their students for fashion marketing, marketing communications and promotion, marketing and management, sports and entertainment marketing, and travel marketing and lodging management career pathways (GA Dept. of Ed., 2010; Scott & Sarkees-Wircenski,

2004). Fewer high school CTE students, 4.3%, were enrolled in marketing education. Of these students, males make up 44% while females make up 56%. Nationally, marketing, sales, and services teachers represent 0.4% of high school teachers in the U.S. (US DOE, 2011).

Instrumentation

There have been numerous leadership research instruments developed and used to measure leadership attributes, skills, styles, and practices (Avolio & Bass, 1999; Bass, 2008;

Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Tupes & Christal, 1961) and several of them were reviewed to determine their appropriateness for this study. . An often used instrument is The Big Five

Personality Test that measures people on five dimensions including openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism - generating highly individualized feedback that is now used in personal development, leadership training, teambuilding, recruitment and candidate assessment (Bass, 2008; Tupes & Christal, 1961).

Another frequently used instrument is the Leadership Practices Inventory that measures transformational leadership traits and an individual‟s competency of exemplary leadership

(Kouzes & Posner, 2002). The Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Avolio & Bass,

1999) is also often used in leadership research. The MLQ identifies the characteristics of a transformational leader and helps individuals discover how they measure up in their own eyes and in the eyes of those with whom they work with (Avolio & Bass, 1999; Bass, 2008). While these instruments would have established validity and reliability for this study, they however,

54 were designed to have general application to leaders of any occupation. Consequently, the Big

Five Personality Test developed by Tupes and Christal (1961), the Leadership Practices

Inventory developed by Kouzes and Posner (2002), and the Multi-Factor Leadership

Questionnaire developed by Avolio and Bass (1999), were deemed inappropriate for this study.

The survey instrument used in this study was the Leader Attributes Inventory (LAI) developed by Moss and Johansen (1994), which was created specifically for CTE (see Appendix A).

Leadership Attributes Inventory

The Leadership Attributes Inventory (LAI) was developed by Moss and Johansen (1991) after an extensive literature review. The instrument was designed specifically for career and technical education to assess the characteristics, skills, knowledge, and values of an individual that predisposes successful leadership performance in CTE. Moss, Lambrect, Jensrud, & Finch

(1994) admitted that while it was never intended for the 37 items in the LAI to be grouped into separate measurable subscales, it would be helpful to know how the attributes might be ordered when designing leadership development programs. Therefore, Jensrud (1995), one of the authors of the final version of the LAI, performed a factor analysis on the 37 attributes on the LAI (see appendix B) and found that they can be divided into five clusters that accounted for 65% of the variance. The clusters are labeled as drive, organization, trust, interpersonal, and tolerance. These five clusters will be used in this research study in order to show results with a manageable amount of data which leads to easier understanding by the reader. Each of the 37 attributes on the instrument fall under one of the five aforementioned clusters. The 37 items and five clusters on the LAI are provided in Appendix B and explained in the following statements. Drive is represented by nine attributes on the survey. Those nine attributes are visionary, initiating, enthusiastic, persistent, energetic, courageous, achievement oriented, networking, and insightful

(items 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 15, 24). An example of drive is “shows commitment to achieving goals and strive to keep improving performance” (Moss, 1994 p. 69). Organization is also represented by nine attributes on the 37-item survey. The attributes representing organization are organizing, planning, time management, information management, intelligent, willing to accept responsibility, decision making, problem solving, and dependable (items 10, 14, 19, 25, 27, 31,

35, 36, and 37). An example of organization is “establishes effective and efficient procedures for getting work done in an orderly manner” (Moss, 1994 p. 70). Trust is characterized by seven attributes. These seven attributes that make up trust are ethical, committed to the common good, sensitivity, ideological beliefs appropriate to the group, accountable, personal integrity, and confident (items 7, 9, 17, 18, 20, 22, 34 on the survey). An example of trust is “holds self answerable for work and willingly admit mistakes” (Moss, 1994 p. 69). Interpersonal is conveyed by six attributes. The interpersonal items on the survey are delegating, conflict management, team-building, coaching, motivating others, and appropriate use of leadership styles (items 23, 26, 28, 29, 30, 33). An example of interpersonal is “creates an environment in which people want to do their best” (Moss, 1994 p. 70). Tolerance is represented by six attributes. Those six attributes are tolerant of frustration, even disposition, adaptable, tolerant of ambiguity and complexity, stress management, and communication (items 3, 5, 13, 16, 21, and

32) (Jensrud, 1995). An example of tolerance is “acts calmly and patiently even when things don‟t go as planned” (Moss, 1994, p. 69).

The instrument asked the respondent to simply mark what “best describes the extent to which the attributes currently describe you” (p. 1). Each attribute was listed along with a description of the attribute. A 6-point Likert scale was used to rate each attribute as follows:

1=Very undescriptive, 2=Undescriptive, 3=Somewhat undescriptive, 4=Somewhat descriptive,

5=Descriptive, and 6=Very descriptive. For this study, the average, or mean, of the ratings from

1 to 1.4 is very undescriptive. A mean of 1.5 to 2.4 is undescriptive, while a mean of 2.5 to 3.4 is somewhat undescriptive. A mean of 3.5 to 4.4 is deemed somewhat descriptive, while a mean of

4.5 to 5.4 is descriptive. Lastly, a mean of 5.5 to 6.0 is rated as very descriptive.

Professional Characteristics and Personal Characteristics

Professional characteristics are skills, abilities, and experiences that may be found to influence the emergence of teacher leadership (Lieberman, Saxl & Miles, 1988; Vail, 1994).

These professional characteristics were investigated based on the review of literature which led to the belief that, in preparing teachers for leadership roles, it is necessary to examine the circumstances in which teacher leadership has thrived. The following professional characteristics information was requested, -educational level, number of years teaching, current job position, location of school, and desire to move into a teacher leadership role.

Personal characteristics are traits that are used as predictors of teacher leaders (Edwards

& Briers, 2001; Vail, 1994) and include race and age. The rationale behind the use of these personal characteristics is to identify predictors of the emergence of leadership behaviors that could be used by teacher educators in pre-service and in-service programs. The information can also be used by supervisors and administrators to provide and strengthen opportunities for teachers to lead (Edwards & Briers, 2001; Vail, 1994). For personal characteristics, race and age

(Edwards & Briers, 2001; Lieberman et al., 1988; Vail, 1994), were requested from participants.

Leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics were investigated because, after a review of the literature, the researcher found that these leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics may influence the emergence of teacher leadership. The researcher found it important to gain a personal and professional understanding

57 of the CTE teacher, to know the fundamentals of their work setting, and to gain insight into their professional future in order to aide in recruitment and retention activities and the development of training programs that can help to enhance these professional characteristics and personal characteristics (Dubinsky, Yammarino & Jolson, 1995; Edward & Briers, 2001; Moss &

Johansen, 1991; Vail, 1994).

The survey instrument included a notification of credit to the original authors of the

Leadership Attributes Inventory, a thank you note for completion, and instructions on how to complete the survey. It was estimated that the survey would take approximately 15 minutes to complete.

Validity and Reliability

Moss and Johansen (1991) conducted three test-retest studies on LAI scores to determine reliability and validity. Statistical analysis revealed the tests consistency or reliability.

Cronbach‟s alpha is most widely used to assess score reliability and indicates the extent that items and scale measure the same thing. The internal consistency of the LAI using Cronbach‟s alpha was determined as .97. The second estimate was .98. Validity measures ranged from .56 to

.82 and had an average score of .70 for all attributes (Moss & Johansen, 1991). Data from the study designed to establish norms and standards for the LAI showed that reliability of the individual attributes scores ranged from .75 to .84. The coefficients for the average were .91

(Moss et al., 1994). The “results of three studies demonstrate that all of the thirty-seven leader attributes are highly related to the leadership effectiveness of vocational administrators” (Moss &

Johansen, 1991, p. 13). However, this validity and reliability were established for a group different than used in this study; this group was female and the questionnaire was administered

58 on-line. Therefore, a pilot test was conducted to establish validity and reliability for this study administered on-line via Survey Monkey.

Pilot Study

The survey instrument was reviewed by a panel of content experts made up of doctoral level students and faculty in the program of Workforce Education at the University of Georgia.

The survey instrument was not validated previously for online use. The task of the panel was to examine and validate the instrument by evaluating whether it was appropriate for the target audience as an online assessment of their leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics. The panel of experts determined that the online instrument was appropriate.

The pilot study utilized a convenience sample of 10 female secondary teachers who served as supervising teachers during the spring 2011 semester for the program of Workforce

Education at the University of Georgia was used to establish reliability of the instrument.

Specifically, the pilot study attempted to answer the following questions:

1. Do the proposed data collection methods work?

2. Is the survey instrument technically adequate?

The survey instrument was administered through Survey Monkey. Survey Monkey was selected because it is an inexpensive yet effective online data-gathering tool. The questionnaire included the implied consent form followed by the LAI and professional and personal characteristics questionnaire. A total of eight participants, an 80% response rate, completed the pilot study survey. Krueger (2001) suggests that a range in pilot study sample size between 10 and 30 people who have similar characteristics to the study population is sufficient enough to conduct statistical calculations. Based upon the results of the pilot study it was determined that

59 the LAI and the questionnaire are effective in determining the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia. The pilot study also determined that prospective participants understood the directions in the instrument and questionnaire, as well as, in the initial and follow-up contacts and were able to complete the survey on the web-based platform of Survey Monkey.

Reliability for this Study

The administration of the LAI to the study respondents found there was a high level of internal consistency. The 37 attributes used a response scale of Very Descriptive (6), Descriptive (5),

Somewhat Descriptive (4), Somewhat Undescriptive (3), Undescriptive (2) and Very Undescriptive

(1). The reliability of the results of the instrument measured using Cronbach‟s internal constancy coefficient alpha yielded an overall α=960 (Cronbach Alpha) demonstrating a high level of internal consistency and reliability of the 37 attribute. Cronbach‟s alpha yielded α=.853 for Drive,

α=.812 for Interpersonal, α=.854 for Organization, α=.863 for Tolerance, and an α=.828 for

Trust (see Appendix C).

Procedure

The Georgia Department of Education (GADOE) was contacted in February 2011, via e- mail, to request contact information for female secondary CTE teachers. A list of 1752 teachers‟ names and school addresses for the 2010-2011 school year was provided to the researcher. After receiving the list from the GADOE, the researcher proceeded single file through each individual teacher to determine the teacher‟s school. After determining the name of the school, the researcher visited the high school‟s website, if one was available, to get the teacher‟s e-mail address. If the teacher‟s e-mail address was available to the public, the teacher became part of the accessible population. There were a total of 1197 valid e-mail addresses found on the respective schools‟ websites, thus becoming the accessible population used for the study.

Once the University of Georgia‟s Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained in April 2011 (Appendix D), a pilot study was conducted with eight of 10 invited participants, for an 80% response rate. After the pilot study was completed, it was found to provide the results necessary to proceed with the study. There were 582 female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia who were sent formal letters of invitation to participate in the research study through the online survey platform Survey Monkey. The letter sent through Survey Monkey on

May 17, 2011 served as the first contact and included an invitation to participate, an introduction to the survey that described the purpose of the study, participation details, and information about consent and anonymity. The letter also contained a link to the survey instrument.

Web-based surveys, in comparison to mail surveys, allow for a much shorter time period with reminder e-mails being sent in mere days after initial contact, rather than weeks later

(Dillman, Smyth & Christian, 2009; Selm & Jankowski, 2006). This research study utilized a three-contact strategy as recommended by Dillman et al. (2009). The three-contact strategy calls for initial contact to be made via e-mail, which took place on May 17, 2011 (Appendix G). The first contact resulted in 70 respondents completing the survey, two individuals opting out of the survey and 19 addresses being bounced out of the e-mail queue and were deemed to not be accessible. The second contact and first follow-up was made eight days later on May 25, 2011

(Appendix H). The second contact was e-mailed to the 561 possible participants and served as both a thank you to the 70 respondents who had completed the survey and as a reminder to those who had not. The second contact resulted in 71 additional respondents completing the survey, for a total of 140 respondents completing the survey thus far. The final contact, also the second follow-up, was sent six days later on May 31, 2011 (Appendix I). It too, served as both a thank you to survey completers and as a reminder to those who had not completed the survey to date.

This third and final contact was sent to the 561 possible participants and focused on the short time left to complete the survey and the importance of completing it (Dillman et al., 2009). The final contact resulted in 38 additional respondents completing the survey. The survey closed one week later on June 8, 2011, with 179 total participants completing the survey. Therefore, the survey was open from May 17 through June 7th, a total of three weeks. The three-contact strategy for the 582 female secondary CTE teachers who were invited to participate in the study resulted in 179 respondents, a 32% response rate. The numbers and percentages of respondents in this study for each program area are: 16 agriculture teachers (8.9%), 77 business education teachers

(43%), 14 engineering and technology teachers (8% ), 44 family and consumer sciences education teachers (24.6%), 11 healthcare science education teachers (6.1%), 12 marketing education teachers (6.7%), and five teachers who did not provide their program area (2.8%).

Survey Monkey‟s efficiency is exhibited through the company‟s management of participants, initial participant invitation, e-mail follow-ups to non-responders, and the compilation of data. After compilation of data in Survey Monkey, the researcher was able to easily export data into the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for analysis.

Data Analysis

The collected data were analyzed based on the three research questions used to guide the study. The analysis utilized both descriptive and inferential statistics. The descriptive statistics used included frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations to describe the independent and dependent variables. The inferential statistics of correlational analysis, specifically Pearson product moment correlation and Spearman‟s rho, were utilized to determine the relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

An alpha level of .05 is, in general, acceptable for most research (Bartlett, Kotrlik, &

Higgins, 2001). An alpha level of .10 or lower is used to identify marginal relationships or differences. An alpha level of .01 is used when decisions based on the research are critical and errors may cause substantial financial or personal harm (e.g. pharmaceutical research). The significance level for this study is an alpha of .05. As summarized in Table 2, statistical analyses were performed to generate descriptive statistics for research question one. The descriptive statistics used are: frequencies, percentages, a measure of central tendency – means, and a measure of variability – standard deviations. Frequencies simply indicate how many individuals were in each response category. It is represented by the symbol ƒ. Percentages were obtained by dividing the frequency by the sum of the frequency and multiplying by 100. The mean is the most common measure of central tendency or center, and is simply the mathematical average. It is represented by the x symbol. The standard deviation measures spread by figuring out how much each variables score deviates from the mean. The standard deviation is abbreviated with

SD or is represented by the symbol s (Gall et al., 2007; Huck, 2008; Moore 2007).

Inferential statistical analyses were also employed in order to indicate the strength of the relationships for research questions two and three. Pearson‟s product-moment correlation is the most frequently used correlation and allows for the comparison of two continuous quantitative variables (Huck, 2008; Moore, 2007). While Pearson product-moment correlation works in cases of mixed variable lists, it is best suited for continuous variables. Lewis (2001) recommends that even though categorical data can be converted to numeric form for statistical purposes, one should choose the correlation coefficient that is best fitted for the data being used in the study. In the case for this research, analyses also employed Spearman‟s rho, along with

Pearson‟s product-moment. Spearman‟s rho, similar to Pearson‟s r, is the second most

63 frequently used correlation and is used to measure the relationship when the variables are categorical (Huck, 2008).

Correlational analysis allows for the identification of relationships among a large number of variables in one study (Gall et al., 2007). The value of the correlation, ranging from +1.00 to -

1.00 indicates the strength of the relationship between the variables. Values close to -1.00 or

+1.00 are viewed as very strong relationships. A strong negative relationship indicates that the higher the score on one variable, the lower the score on the second variable. A strong positive relationship indicates a high score on one variable also results in a high score on the other

(Gloeckner, Gliner, Tochterman, & Morgan, 2001; Huck, 2008).

For research question one, frequencies and percentages were used to identify how often leadership attributes were chosen and the means calculated will be used to determine the average scores of the data (Moore, 2007). For the second research question, Pearson‟s product moment correlation was used to determine the strength of the relationship between the independent variables of the professional characteristics: years of experience and educational level, and the dependent variables of the leadership attributes. Spearman‟s rho was used to determine the strength of the relationship between the independent variables of the professional characteristics of location of school, desire for future leadership role, current area of teaching, and the dependent variables of the leadership attributes. The third research question also utilized

Pearson‟s product moment correlation in order to determine the relationships between the independent variable of the personal characteristic: age and the dependent variables of the leadership attributes. Spearman‟s rho was used to determine the relationship between the independent variable of the personal characteristic: race, and the dependent variables of the

leadership attributes. The statistical techniques used to analyze each research question are given

in Table 1.

Table 1 Data Analyses for Research Questions Research Question Dependent Variable Independent Variable Data Analysis What are the leadership attributes, Leadership Professional Characteristics Means, professional characteristics, and Attributes Years of experience Frequencies, personal characteristics of Drive Educational level Percentages, secondary female CTE teachers in Organization Location of school Standard Georgia? Leadership attributes Trust Desire for future Deviations included the following clusters: Tolerance leadership status drive, organization, trust, Interpersonal Current area of tolerance, and interpersonal. teaching Professional characteristics Personal Characteristics included: years of teaching Race experience, educational level, Age area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership position. Personal characteristics included: race and age

Is there a relationship between the Leadership Attributes Professional Characteristics Pearson‟s leadership attributes and the Drive Years of experience Product professional characteristics of Organization Educational level Moment secondary female CTE teachers in Trust Location of school Correlation Georgia? Leadership attributes Tolerance Desire for future included the following clusters: Interpersonal leadership status Spearman‟s drive, organization, trust, Current area of rho tolerance, and interpersonal. teaching Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience, educational level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership position

Is there a relationship between the Leadership Attributes Personal Characteristics Pearson‟s leadership attributes and personal Drive Race Product characteristics of secondary Organization Age Moment female CTE teachers in Georgia? Trust Correlation Leadership attributes included the Tolerance following clusters: drive, Interpersonal Spearman‟s organization, trust, tolerance, and rho interpersonal. Personal characteristics included: race and age

CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS

The purpose of this chapter was to describe the findings obtained from the survey instrument completed by the 179 secondary female career and technical education teachers employed during the 2010/2011 school-year. Data analyses were based on the self-ratings of leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics by 179 respondents. Findings are organized by research questions. The research questions are following.

4. What are the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

d. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

e. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience,

educational level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future

leadership position

f. Personal characteristics included race and age

5. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and the professional

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience, educational

level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership

position

6. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and personal characteristics of

secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Personal characteristics included: race and age

Analysis of Research Questions

Research Question 1

What are the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

Leadership Attributes

Female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia were asked to rate the 37 attributes on the

Leader Attributes Inventory (LAI) questionnaire to the degree that each perceived the attribute to be very undescriptive to very descriptive of themselves. A 6-point Likert scale was used to rate each leadership attribute as follows: 1 = very undescriptive, 2 = undescriptive, 3 = somewhat undescriptive, 4 = somewhat descriptive, 5 = descriptive, and 6 = very descriptive. Jensrud

(1995) grouped the 37 leadership attributes on the LAI questionnaire into five clusters. Those clusters are trust, organization, drive, interpersonal, and tolerance. There were between six and nine attributes for each of the five clusters on the LAI. Participants were asked to rate themselves for each attribute.

Frequencies and Percentages for Leadership Attributes

Table 2 shows the descriptive analyses (frequencies and percentages) of the 37 leadership attributes, which are presented according to the five clusters. Of the 37 leadership attributes, teachers rated 12 (32.4%) of the leadership attributes more frequently as being very descriptive of themselves. For those 12 leadership attributes, there were five attributes under the trust cluster, four were under the drive cluster, and three were under organization. On the other hand,

25 or 67.6%, of the leadership attributes were rated more frequently by teachers as descriptive of themselves. Of these 25 leadership attributes, the organization, interpersonal, and tolerance clusters each had six attributes rated as descriptive, while drive had five attributes, and trust had two attributes.

The two leadership attributes with the lowest ratings of undescriptive to somewhat undescriptive of respondents were courageous, risk taker, under the cluster drive, with 7.3%.

The second leadership attribute was stress management, under the cluster tolerance, with 7.8% of teachers indicating that this attribute was very undescriptive to somewhat undescriptive of themselves (see Table 2).

Leadership Attribute-Trust Cluster. For the leadership attribute cluster of Trust, five of the seven leadership attributes associated with this cluster were rated between 55% and 73% as being very descriptive of respondents. The top three attributes were ethical, accountable, and personal integrity, respectively. There were 130 respondents who rated ethical as very descriptive of themselves resulting in 72.6% of the responses. The second ranked attribute was accountable with 59.8% (n= 107) of respondents rating it as very descriptive. Personal integrity ranked third with 58.1% (n= 104) of respondents rating it as very descriptive. Two leadership

Table 2

Frequencies and Percentages for the 37 Leadership Attributes by Clusters

Leadership Attributes VU U SU SD D VD Category ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % TRUST Ethical* 1 .6 3 1.7 38 21.2 130 72.6 Personal integrity* 1 .6 7 3.9 53 29.6 112 62.6 Committed to the common 1 .6 4 2.2 62 34.6 104 58.1 good* Accountable* 1 .6 1 .6 5 2.8 59 33 107 59.8 Sensitivity, respect* 1 .6 1 .6 10 5.6 61 34.1 99 55.3 Ideological beliefs are 2 1.1 1 .6 2 1.1 11 6.1 83 46.4 74 41.3 appropriate to the group** Confident, accepting of self** 1 .6 1 .6 22 12.3 75 41.9 72 40.2

ORGANIZATION Dependable, reliable* 1 .6 1 .6 4 22 40 22.3 126 70.4 Willing to accept 1 .6 1 .6 13 7.3 57 31.8 102 57 responsibility* Intelligent with practical 1 .6 1 .6 10 5.6 79 44.1 83 46.4 judgment* Decision-making** 1 .6 1 .6 1 .6 23 12.8 78 43.6 70 39.1 Problem solving** 2 1.1 1 .6 21 11.7 86 48 64 35.8 Time management** 1 .6 1 .6 2 1.1 26 14.5 76 42.5 68 38 Planning** 1 .6 2 1.1 27 15.1 78 43.6 64 35.8 Organizing** 1 .6 2 1.1 5 2.8 26 14.5 72 40.2 68 38 Information management** 1 .6 2 1.1 8 4.5 37 20.7 70 39.1 55 30.7

DRIVE Achievement oriented* 1 .6 1 .6 14 7.8 63 35.2 99 55.3 Energetic with stamina* 1 .6 19 10.6 67 37.4 92 51.4 Enthusiastic, Optimistic* 1 .6 25 14 66 36.9 86 48 Persistent* 3 1.7 23 12.8 70 39.1 80 44.7 Visionary** 1 .6 27 15.1 78 43.6 73 40.8 Insightful** 1 .6 24 13.4 96 53.6 58 32.4 Initiating** 1 .6 31 17.3 79 44.1 63 35.2 Networking** 1 .6 8 4.5 37 20.7 68 38 65 36.3 Courageous, risk taker** 13 7.3 40 22.3 74 41.3 51 28.5 Note: In table heading: VU = Very Undescriptive, U = Undescriptive, SU = Somewhat Undescriptive, SD = Somewhat Descriptive, D = Descriptive, VD = Very Descriptive. % may not total 100% because of rounding. * Very Descriptive, ** Descriptive Overall rating of leadership attributes

(table continues)

Leadership Attributes VU U SU SD D VD Category ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % ƒ % INTERPERSONAL Motivating others** 18 10.1 86 48 68 38 Coaching** 23 12.8 86 48 62 34.6 Teambuilding** 1 .6 1 .6 32 17.9 82 45.8 56 31.3 Appropriate use of leadership 1 .6 3 1.7 32 17.9 82 45.8 54 30.2 styles** Conflict management** 2 1.1 8 4.5 48 26.8 70 39.1 44 24.6 Delegating** 1 .6 9 5 51 28.5 75 41.9 36 20.1

TOLERANCE Communication ** 1 .6 1 .6 14 7.8 83 46.4 73 40.8 Adaptable, open to change** 1 .6 24 13.4 80 44.7 67 37.4 Even disposition** 1 .6 1 .6 3 1.7 43 24 63 35.2 60 33.5 Tolerant of ambiguity and 3 1.7 5 2.8 44 24.6 79 44.1 41 22.9 complexity** Stress management** 2 1.1 2 1.1 10 5.6 40 22.3 80 44.7 38 21.2 Tolerant of frustration** 1 .6 3 1.7 6 3.4 53 29.6 77 43 32 17.9

Note: In table heading: VU = Very Undescriptive, U = Undescriptive, SU = Somewhat Undescriptive, SD = Somewhat Descriptive, D = Descriptive, VD = Very Descriptive. % may not total 100% because of rounding. * Very Descriptive, ** Descriptive Overall rating of leadership attributes

attributes under the Trust cluster were rated lower than 50% each as descriptive of respondents.

These leadership attributes were ideological beliefs that are appropriate to the group with 46.4%

(n= 83) of respondents indicating it as descriptive, and confident, accepting of self with 41.9%

(n= 75) of respondents rating it as descriptive.

Leadership Attribute-Organization Cluster. The Organization cluster had nine leadership attributes associated with it. The top ranked attribute was dependable, reliable with

126 respondents who rated this attribute as very descriptive of themselves resulting in 70.4% of the respondents for this attribute (see Table 2). Willing to accept responsibility ranked second with 57% (n=102) of respondents signifying this attribute as very descriptive. Those leadership attributes ranked three through seven; which were intelligent with practical judgment, decision-

70 making, problem-solving, time management, and planning, each revealed less than 50% of respondents who rated the attributes as very descriptive or descriptive of themselves. Organizing was the eighth ranked attribute with 40.2% (n= 72) respondents indicating it as descriptive. The final attribute was information management with 39.1% (n= 70) of respondents signifying it as descriptive (Table 2).

Leadership Attribute-Drive Cluster. The Drive cluster had nine attributes that included achievement oriented; energetic with stamina; enthusiastic, optimistic; persistent; visionary, insightful, initiating, networking, and courageous, risk taker. For Drive, there were

55.3% (n = 99) of the respondents who rated the attribute achievement oriented as very descriptive of themselves as shown in Table 2. The second ranked attribute was energetic with stamina with 51.4% (n = 92) respondents who rated the attribute as very descriptive of themselves. The third attribute, enthusiastic, optimistic and fourth attribute persistent were also rated by respondents as being very descriptive of themselves. Visionary, insightful, and initiating were rated by respondents as descriptive of themselves. Networking ranked eighth with 38% (n= 68) of respondents indicating this attribute descriptive of themselves. The last attribute is courageous, risk taker with 41.3% (n= 74) of respondents who rated this attribute as descriptive (Table 2).

Leadership Attribute-Interpersonal Cluster. The fourth cluster was interpersonal which contained the six leadership attributes of motivating others, coaching, teambuilding, appropriate use of leadership styles, conflict management, and delegating (see Table 2). The top ranking attribute was motivating others with 38% (n = 68) respondents who rated this attribute as very descriptive of themselves. The second ranked attribute was coaching with 48% (n = 86) of respondents who rated the attribute as descriptive of themselves. Both the third and fourth

71 attributes posted 45.8% (n = 82) of respondents who indicated that these attributes were descriptive of them. Conflict management ranked fifth with 39.1% (n= 70) of respondents who indicated this attribute descriptive of themselves. The leadership attribute, delegating, ranked sixth with 41.9%. (n = 75) of respondents who signified this attribute as descriptive of them

(Table 2).

Leadership Attribute-Tolerance Cluster. There were six leadership attributes under the Tolerance cluster. The attributes were communication; adaptable, open to change, even disposition, tolerant of ambiguity and complexity, stress management, and tolerant of frustration

(see Table 2). The top ranking attribute was communication with 46.4% (n = 83) respondents who rated this attribute as very descriptive of themselves. Adaptable, open to change ranked second with 44.7% (n=80) of respondents signifying this attribute as descriptive. The third through sixth ranked attributes were all rated as descriptive as well with, the fifth ranked attribute, stress management, having 44.7% (n= 80) of respondents signifying this attribute as descriptive. Tolerant of frustration was ranked sixth with 43% (n= 77) of respondents indicating it as descriptive (Table 2).

Mean Ratings (or Means and Standard Deviations) for Leadership Attributes

The mean scores on the 37 attributes as shown in Table 3 ranged from a low of 4.7 on the attribute, tolerant of frustration within the Tolerance cluster, to a high of 5.7 on the attribute, ethical within the Trust cluster. The following paragraphs present the data by the five clusters – trust, organization, drive, interpersonal, and tolerance. For this study, the average, or means, of the ratings from 1 to 1.4 is very undescriptive. A mean of 1.5 to 2.4 is undescriptive, while a mean of 2.5 to 3.4 is somewhat undescriptive. A mean of 3.5 to 4.4 is deemed somewhat

72 descriptive, while a mean of 4.5 to 5.4 is descriptive. Lastly, a 5.5 to 6.0 is rated as very descriptive.

Table 3

Means and Standard Deviations for Leadership Attributes

Leadership Attributes Category N x SD TRUST Ethical 172 5.7 .60 Personal integrity 173 5.6 .67 Committed to the common good 171 5.6 .68 Accountable 173 5.6 .64 Sensitivity, respect 172 5.5 .72 Ideological beliefs are appropriate 173 5.3 .84 to the group Confident, accepting of self 171 5.3 .78 TOTAL 5.5

Dependable, reliable 172 5.7 .65 Willing to accept responsibility 174 5.5 .74 Intelligent with practical 174 5.4 .71 judgment Decision-making 174 5.2 .81 Problem solving 174 5.2 .76 Time management 174 5.2 .84 Planning 172 5.2 .80 Organizing 174 5.1 .92 Information management 173 4.9 .96 TOTAL 5.3

DRIVE Achievement oriented 17 8 5.4 .77 Energetic with stamina 179 5.4 .75 Enthusiastic, Optimistic 178 5.3 .73 Persistent 176 5.3 .76 Visionary 179 5.2 .77 Insightful 179 5.2 .67 Initiating 174 5.2 .75 Networking 179 5.0 .92 Courageous, risk taker 179 4.9 .92 TOTAL 5.2 (table continues) 73

INTERPERSONAL Motivating others 172 5.3 .65 Coaching 171 5.2 .67 Teambuilding 172 5.1 .79 Appropriate use of leadership 172 5.1 .81 styles Conflict management 172 4.9 .90 Delegating 172 4.8 .85 TOTAL 5.1

TOLERANCE Communication 172 5.3 .73 Adaptable, open to change 172 5.2 .71 Even disposition 171 5.0 .91 Tolerant of ambiguity & 172 4.9 .87 complexity Stress management 172 4.8 .97 Tolerant of frustration 172 4.7 .90 TOTAL 5.0

Mean Scores for Leadership Attributes-Trust Cluster. The data revealed that respondents ranked themselves highest overall in the leadership attribute Trust cluster with a mean score of 5.5 as shown in Table 3. For the Trust cluster the seven attributes were ranked very closely together. The top ranked attribute is ethical with mean score of 5.7 and a standard deviation (SD) of .60. While the seventh and last ranked attribute is confident, accepting of self with a mean score of 5.3 and a SD of .78 (Table 3).

Mean Scores for Leadership Attributes-Organization Cluster. Organization was the second highest rated leadership attribute cluster with an overall mean score of 5.3 and standard deviation of .80. This revealed that respondents fell into the descriptive rating for this cluster.

For the Organization cluster, the top ranking attribute was: dependable, reliable with a mean score of 5.7 and a SD of .65. Willing to accept responsibility ranked second with a mean score of 5.5 and a SD of .74. The leadership attributes ranked three through seven; which are

74 intelligent with practical judgment, decision-making, problem-solving, time management, and planning, were separated by their mean scores of only 0.2. Organizing is the eighth ranked attribute with a mean score of 5.1 of SD of .92. The ninth and final attribute is information management with a mean score of 4.9 and a SD of .96 (Table 3).

Mean Scores for Leadership Attributes-Drive Cluster. The third ranked leadership attribute Drive cluster had a mean score of 5.22, signifying that this cluster was descriptive of respondents (see Table 3). For Drive, the top ranking attribute was achievement oriented with a mean score of 5.4 and a SD of .77. The second ranked attribute was energetic with stamina with a mean score of 5.4 and a SD of .75. The third through seventh attributes had mean scores that were separated by 0.1. Networking ranked eighth with a mean score of 5.0 and a SD of .92. The last attribute is courageous, risk taker with a mean score of 4.9 and a SD of .92 (Table 3).

Mean Scores for Leadership Attributes-Interpersonal Cluster. The fourth leadership attribute cluster, interpersonal, had a mean score of 5.1 and was rated descriptive of most respondents as shown in Table 3. The Interpersonal cluster had the top ranking attribute motivating others with a mean score of 5.3 and a SD of .65. The second, third, and fourth ranked attributes all maintained mean scores above 5.1. With a mean of 4.9 and a SD of .90, conflict management ranked fifth and delegating ranked sixth with a mean score of 4.8 and a SD of .85.

Mean Scores for Leadership Attributes-Tolerance Cluster. The fifth and lowest ranked cluster was tolerance with a total mean score of 5.0 and a standard deviation of .85 as shown in Table 3. This indicated that this cluster was descriptive of respondents. The Tolerance cluster has the top ranking attribute communication with a mean score of 5.3 and a SD of .73.

Adaptable, open to change ranked second with a mean score of 5.2 and a SD of .71. The third ranked attribute is even disposition with a mean of 5.0 and a SD of .91. The fourth ranked

75 attribute, tolerant of ambiguity and complexity, the fifth ranked attribute stress management, and tolerant of frustration all revealed mean scores less than 5.0 (Table 3).

Professional Characteristics

Female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia were asked to provide information concerning select professional characteristics. Those characteristics included years of teaching experience, educational level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership positions. The results are illustrated in Table 4.

Table 4 Descriptive Statistics for Professional Characteristics Professional Characteristics Ƒ % Years of Teaching Experience (n=169) 0-5 40 22.4 6-10 43 23.9 11-15 26 14.6 16-20 27 15.1 21-25 16 8.9 26-30 14 7.8 30+ 3 1.7 Missing Data 10 5.6

Educational Level(n=170) Bachelor 33 18.4 M.Ed 65 36.3 MAT 8 4.5 Master – Other 19 10.6 Specialist 36 20.1 Ed.D 7 3.9 Ph.D 2 1.1 Missing Data 9 5

Current Area of Teaching (n=170) Agriculture 16 8.9 Business 76 42.5 Engineering & Technology 13 7.3 Family & Consumer Sciences 43 24 Health Science 12 6.7 Marketing 10 5.6 Missing Data 9 5

(table continues)

LOCATION OF SCHOOL (n=171) Rural 66 36.9 Suburban 75 41.9 Urban 30 16.8 Missing Data 8 4.5

DESIRE FOR FUTURE LEADERSHIP ROLE (n=170) Yes 63 35.2 No 107 59.8 Missing Data 9 5 Note: % may not total 100% because of rounding.

Years of teaching experience. The data revealed that the teaching experience of the respondents ranged from one to over 30 years. The average years of teaching experience was

12.8 years with a mode of 10. The most frequent range of years of experience was found to be 6 to 10 years and made up 23.9% of the total responses (Table 4).

Educational level. The data revealed that over 60% of respondents held higher level degrees. The majority, 36.3%, of the respondents held a Master of Education degree (M.Ed).

There were 15.1% who held a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) or a Master degree in another area. There were 20.1% of respondents who had a Specialist degree and 5% who had Doctorate degrees (Table 4).

Area of teaching. Of the respondents, the majority, 42.5%, was business education teachers, 24% were family and consumer sciences teachers, 8.9% were agriculture teachers, and

7.3% taught in the area of engineering and technology. All other areas of teaching each fell below 7% (see Table 4).

Location of school. A suburban location of the school made up 41.9% of where respondents worked. A rural location made up 36.9% and an urban location made up 16.8%.

There were 4.5% non-responses to this characteristic (Table 4).

Desire for future leadership position. There were 59.8% of respondents who have no desire to pursue a leadership position. However, 35.2% of respondents have a desire to take on a leadership position (Table 4). Of those teachers who desire to pursue a leadership position,

27.4% of them aspire for an Assistant Principal position, 16.1% desire an unspecified position in administration, and 9.7% indicated that they would like to become Directors. The positions in curriculum and department head both received 8.7% from the respondents. There are 6.5% percent of teachers who desire positions as counselors. There were 15 other positions named that total 24% of what respondents desired (see Table 5).

Table 5 Desired Future Leadership Roles

Desired Position (N=62) Ƒ %

Assistant Principal 17 27.4 Administration 10 16.1 Director 6 9.7 Department Head 5 8.7 Curriculum 5 8.7 Counselor 4 6.5 Coordinator 1 1.6 CTE Chair 1 1.6 Dean 1 1.6 Educational Technology 1 1.6 Instructional Supervisor 1 1.6 Lead Teacher 1 1.6 Leadership 1 1.6 Model Teacher Leader 1 1.6 Outside of school environment 1 1.6 Policy Maker 1 1.6 Professor 1 1.6 Program Specialist 1 1.6 State Area Teacher 1 1.6 Supervisor – CTAE 1 1.6 Work Based Learning Coordinator 1 1.6 Note: % may not total 100% because of rounding.

Personal Characteristics

Female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia were asked to provide information concerning select personal characteristics. Those characteristics included were age and race. The results are shown in Table 6.

Age

Female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia ranged in age from 24 to 64 years old with the mean age of 44 and the mode of 54. Respondents ranging in age from 50 to 59 years old made up 30.8% of the total number of study participants. This percent is slightly less than a third of the participants in this study (Table 6).

Race

Of the study‟s respondents who identified ethnicity, the majority, 64.8%, were Caucasian and 25.1 were African American. Hispanic teachers accounted for 1.1% of the respondents as shown in Table 6.

Table 6 Descriptive Statistics for Personal Characteristics Personal Characteristics Cluster N % Mean Mode AGE 44.0 54 21-29 22 12.4 30-39 37 20.7 40-49 43 24 50-59 55 30.8 60-69 7 4 Missing Data 15 8.3

RACE African American/Black 45 25.1 Asian Caucasian/White 116 64.8 Hispanic 2 1.1 Other Missing Data 16 8.9 Note: % may not total 100% because of rounding.

Research Question 2

Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and the professional characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

Pearson‟s product-moment was used to calculate the correlations of the five leadership attributes clusters (tolerance, drive, organization, interpersonal, and trust) with the continuous variables, years of teaching and educational level. The results are shown in Table 7.

Table 7

Correlations of Leadership Attributes by Clusters and Professional Characteristics for Years of Teaching and Educational Level

Leadership Attributes Pearson Product Moment Correlation Cluster n x SD r p r p TRUST Yrs. Yrs. Educ. Educ. Ethical 172 5.7 .60 .10 .19 -.08 .28 Personal integrity 173 5.6 .67 .10 .20 -.16* .04 Accountable 173 5.6 .68 .15 .05 .00 1.0 Committed to the common good 171 5.6 .64 .03 .69 -.01 .90 Sensitivity, respect 172 5.5 .72 .19* .02 -.00 1.0 Ideological beliefs are appropriate 173 5.3 .84 .18* .02 -.01 .92 to the group Confident, accepting of self 171 5.3 .78 .15 .05 .00 .77

ORGANIZATION Dependable, reliable 172 5.7 .65 .12 .12 -.07 .35 Willing to accept responsibility 174 5.5 .74 .14 .07 .04 .65 Intelligent with practical 174 5.4 .71 .10 .21 .00 .98 judgment Decision-making 174 5.2 .81 .21** .01 -.07 .37 Problem solving 174 5.2 .76 .18* .02 -.06 .44

ORGANIZATION Yrs. Yrs. Educ. Educ. Time management 174 5.2 .84 .13 .11 -.03 .74 Planning 172 5.2 .80 .08 .30 -.04 .66 Organizing 174 5.1 .92 .04 .57 .01 .94 Information management 173 4.9 .96 .15 .06 -.09 .23

80 (table continues)

Leadership Attributes Pearson Product Moment Correlation Cluster n x SD r p r p DRIVE Achievement oriented 178 5.4 .77 .10 .20 .06 .42 Energetic with stamina 179 5.4 .75 .18* .02 -.03 .67 Enthusiastic, Optimistic 178 5.3 .73 .03 .69 .01 .86 Persistent 176 5.3 .76 .27** .00 -.04 .59 Visionary 179 5.2 .77 .10 .21 .01 .88 Insightful 179 5.2 .67 .22** .00 .06 .41 Initiating 174 5.2 .75 .17* .03 .05 .55 Networking 179 5.0 .92 .13 .09 -.02 .83 Courageous, risk taker 179 4.9 .92 .15* .05 -.06 .45

INTERPERSONAL Motivating others 172 5.3 .65 .12 .13 -.04 .62 Coaching 171 5.2 .67 .17* .03 .04 .57 Teambuilding 172 5.1 .79 .14 .07 .11 .17 Appropriate use of leadership 172 5.1 .81 .13 .09 .08 .28 styles Conflict management 172 4.9 .90 .04 .60 .07 .37 Delegating 172 4.8 .85 .09 .25 .10 .22

TOLERANCE Communication 172 5.3 .728 .07 .40 -.02 .82 Adaptable, open to change 172 5.2 .706 .08 .31 -.05 .53 Even disposition 171 5.0 .907 .02 .78 .03 .71 Tolerant of ambiguity & 172 4.9 .869 .02 .79 .06 .44 complexity Stress management 172 4.8 .969 .03 .68 -.06 .46 Tolerant of frustration 172 4.7 .904 .03 .75 .04 .64 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) P ≤ 0.05; Yrs. = Years of teaching; Educ. = Educational level

Years of Teaching

The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of years of teaching with any leadership attribute in the Tolerance cluster. There were two positive statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Trust cluster with the characteristic years of teaching. The attributes are sensitivity, respect (p= .02) and ideological

81 beliefs that are appropriate to the group (p= .02) (see Table 7). Post hoc comparisons using the

Fisher LSD revealed that teachers with 20-29 years of teaching experience showed significantly higher mean ratings on these leadership attributes than teachers with 0-9 years of teaching experience.

There were two positive statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Organization cluster with the characteristic years of teaching. The attributes are problem solving (p=.02) and decision-making (p = .01) in Table 7. Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers with 10-19 years of teaching experience showed significantly higher mean ratings on problem solving than teachers with 0-9 years of teaching experience. For the leadership attribute of decision making on years of teaching experience, teachers with 10-19 and teachers with 20-29 years of teaching experience showed significantly higher mean ratings than teachers with 0-9 years of experience.

Pearson‟s product-moment correlation computed positive statistically significant relationships for five of the leadership attributes under the Drive cluster with the professional characteristic years of teaching. The attributes are energetic with stamina (p=.02), persistent (p=

.00), insightful (p= .00), initiating (p= .03), and courageous, risk-taker (p=.05) (Table 7). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers with 10-19 years of experience and those with 30-39 years of teaching experience showed significantly higher mean ratings on the leadership attribute energetic with stamina than teachers with 0-9 years of experience. For the leadership attributes of persistent and insightful on years of teaching experience, teachers in the

10-19, 20-29, and 30-39 years of teaching range had significantly higher mean ratings than those with 0-9 years of teaching experience. For the leadership attribute of initiating on years of teaching experience, teachers with 10-19 years of experience had significantly higher mean

82 ratings than teachers with 0-9 years of teaching experience. For the leadership attribute of courageous, risk-taker those with 20-29 years of teaching experience had significantly higher mean ratings than teachers with 0-9 years of teaching experience.

There was one positive statistically significant relationship for the leadership attributes under the Interpersonal cluster with the professional characteristic years of teaching. The attribute is coaching (p= .03) (Table 7). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers with 30-39 years of experience had higher mean ratings on the leadership attribute coaching than teachers with 0-9 years of teaching experience. .

Educational Level

The data revealed that there were no significant correlations found with any of the leadership attributes in the Organization, Drive, Interpersonal, and Tolerance clusters for the professional characteristic of educational level as shown in Table 7. There is one statistically significant relationship in the Trust cluster with the leadership attribute of personal integrity (p=

.04) and the professional characteristic educational level. The relationship revealed a negative correlation indicating that if the teacher rated the leadership attribute personal integrity high, they would rate their educational level low; or if the teacher rated their educational level high, then the leadership attribute of personal integrity was rated lower. This however, does not mean that one causes the other (i.e. having higher personal integrity does not mean one has low education or vice versa) (Table 7). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers with a Bachelor‟s degree or a Master of Education degree as their highest level degree had significantly higher mean ratings on the leadership attribute personal integrity than teachers with a Specialist degree as their highest degree.

Spearman‟s rho was used to calculate the correlations of the leadership attributes with the categorical variables that included location of the school, area of teaching, and desire for future leadership role on the five clusters (trust, organization, drive, tolerance, and interpersonal). The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of location of the school and area of teaching with any leadership attribute in the five clusters.

Desire for Future Leadership

There were no significant correlations found with any of the leadership attributes in the

Trust cluster for desire for future leadership role. There were four negative statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Organization cluster with the characteristic desire for future leadership role. The attributes are willing to accept responsibility

(p= .00), problem solving (p=.03), planning (p= .16), intelligent with practical judgment (p=.01)

(Table 8). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers who desired a future leadership role showed higher mean ratings on the leadership attribute willing to accept responsibility than teachers who did not have a desire.

Spearman‟s rho correlation computed negative statistically significant relationships for four of the leadership attributes under the Drive cluster with the characteristic desire for future leadership role. The attributes are visionary (p=.01), achievement oriented (p= .04), enthusiastic, optimistic (p=.04), and courageous, risk-taker (p=.02) (Table 8). The post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed higher mean ratings on the leadership attributes enthusiastic, optimistic and courageous, risk-taker for those teachers who desired a future leadership role than teachers who did not.

There were five statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Interpersonal cluster with the characteristic desire for future leadership role (see Table 8).

The attributes are coaching (p= .01), teambuilding (p= -01), delegating (p= .02), conflict management (p= .01), and appropriate use of leadership styles (p= .01). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers who desire a future leadership role showed higher mean ratings on the leadership attributes of coaching, teambuilding, delegating, and conflict management than teachers who did not desire a leadership role.

There were three statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Tolerance cluster with the characteristic desire for future leadership role. The attributes are tolerant of ambiguity and complexity (p= .014), communication (p=.030), and stress management

(p= .025) (Table 8). These attributes revealed a negative correlation indicating that if the teacher rated the leadership attribute high, they would rate their desire for future leadership role low; or if the teacher rated their desire high, then the leadership attribute was rated lower. This however, does not mean that one causes the other (i.e. having the desire for a future leadership role does not make one a courageous risk-taker or vice versa). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that teachers who desire a future leadership role showed higher mean ratings on the leadership attribute of tolerant of ambiguity and complexity than teachers who did not desire a leadership role.

Table 8

Correlations of Leadership Attributes and Professional Characteristics for Location of School, Area of Teaching, and Desire for Future Leadership Role

Leadership Attributes Spearman‟s Rho Cluster N x SD r p r p r p TRUST Loc Loc Area Area Desire Desire Ethical 172 5.7 .60 -.04 .61 .01 .88 -.04 .58 Personal integrity 173 5.6 .67 .03 .66 .04 .62 -.05 .50 Accountable 173 5.6 .68 -.08 .29 .05 .49 -.15 .05 Committed to the common good 171 5.6 .64 -.06 .44 .04 .59 -.13 .10

(table continues) 85

Leadership Attributes Spearman‟s Rho Cluster N x SD r p r p r p TRUST Sensitivity, respect 172 5.5 .72 .01 .86 .11 .15 -.02 .85 Ideological beliefs are 173 5.3 .84 -.01 .94 -.02 .81 -.05 .51 appropriate to the group Confident, accepting of self 171 5.3 .78 -.00 .98 .08 .32 -.08 .30

ORGANIZATION Dependable, reliable 172 5.7 .65 -.03 .68 .08 .29 .01 .88 Willing to accept responsibility 174 5.5 .74 -.03 .71 .13 .10 -.27** .00 Intelligent with practical 174 5.4 .71 -.06 .41 .05 .50 -.20* .01 judgment Decision-making 174 5.2 .81 .04 .58 .04 .64 -.07 .35 Problem solving 174 5.2 .76 .01 .90 .05 .49 -.17* .03 Time management 174 5.2 .84 -.08 .33 .13 .09 .02 .82 Planning 172 5.2 .80 .10 .18 .07 .36 -.16* .05 Organizing 174 5.1 .92 .02 .75 .12 .14 -.04 .63 Information management 173 5.0 .96 .01 .93 .01 .93 -.09 .26

DRIVE Achievement oriented 178 5.4 .77 .02 .76 .08 .32 -.16* .04 Energetic with stamina 179 5.4 .75 -.15 .04 .08 .33 -.05 .53 Enthusiastic, Optimistic 178 5.3 .73 .05 .54 .04 .64 -.16* .04 Persistent 176 5.3 .76 -.05 .53 .01 .91 -.06 .48 Visionary 179 5.2 .77 .02 .78 .04 .60 -.20* .01 Insightful 179 5.2 .67 -.08 .33 .06 .45 -.13 .09 Initiating 174 5.2 .75 -.02 .77 .14 .07 -.12 .13 Networking 179 5.0 .92 -.05 .49 -.01 .94 -.11 .15 Courageous, risk taker 179 4.9 .92 .05 .53 .03 .70 -.19* .02

INTERPERSONAL Motivating others 172 5.3 .65 .03 .70 .13 .09 -.13 .10 Coaching 171 5.2 .67 -.03 .66 .09 .24 -.21** .01 Teambuilding 172 5.1 .79 .06 .48 .01 .95 -.21** .01 Appropriate use of leadership 172 5.1 .81 -.03 .68 .04 .57 -.19* .01 styles Conflict management 172 4.9 .90 .09 .24 .07 .36 -.20* .01 Delegating 172 4.8 .85 .06 .44 .00 .97 -.17* .02

TOLERANCE Communication 172 5.3 .73 -.04 .58 .02 .76 -.17* .03 Adaptable, open to change 172 5.2 .71 .08 .29 .04 .64 -.15 .05 Even disposition 171 5.0 .91 -.04 .64 .02 .80 -.07 .40 Tolerant of ambiguity & 172 4.9 .87 .08 .33 .12 .11 -.19* .01 complexity (table continues) 86

Leadership Attributes Spearman‟s Rho Cluster N x SD r p r p r p Stress management 172 4.8 .97 .02 .76 .11 .15 -.17* .03 Tolerant of frustration 172 4.7 .90 -.06 .41 .07 .34 -.07 .36 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) P ≤ 0.05; Loc. = Location of school; Area = Area of teaching; Desire = Desire for future leadership role

Research Question 3

Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and personal characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

Pearson‟s product-moment was used to calculate the correlations of the leadership attributes with the continuous variable of age. The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of age with any leadership attribute in the leadership attribute of Organization, Interpersonal, or Tolerance clusters.

Age

There were four statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Trust cluster with the characteristic age. The attributes are accountable (p=.01), sensitivity, respect (p= .00), ideological beliefs that are appropriate to the group (p= .00), and confident, accepting of self (p= .02) (Table 9). The data indicated positive correlations for all statistically significant relationships with the personal characteristic of age. This indicated that if the teacher rated a leadership attribute high, her age was higher, or if the teacher rated the leadership attribute low, her age was lower. This does not, however, mean that one causes the other. Post hoc comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between teachers in the 20-29 year age range and all other teachers for the leadership attributes of sensitivity, respect, ideological

87 beliefs that are appropriate to the group, and confident, accepting of self. Teachers with 20-29 years of teaching experience tended to have lower mean ratings than all other teachers.

Pearson‟s product-moment correlation revealed statistically significant relationships for two of the leadership attributes under the Drive cluster with the personal characteristic age, as shown in Table 9. The attributes are energetic with stamina (p=.02) and insightful (p= .02). A summary of the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the leadership attributes and the personal characteristic age can be seen in Table 9. Post hoc comparisons revealed that teachers in the 50-59 year age range had a higher mean rating on the leadership attribute of energetic with stamina than teachers in the 20-29 year age range. Teachers in the 40-49 year age range and those in the 50-59 year age range had a higher mean rating on the leadership attribute of insightful than teachers in the 20-29 year age range.

Table 9

Correlations of Leadership Attributes and Personal Characteristic for Age

Leadership Attributes Pearson Product Correlation Cluster n x SD r p TRUST Age Age Ethical 172 5.72 .597 .12 .13 Personal integrity 173 5.58 .665 .13 .11 Accountable 173 5.55 .677 .19* .01 Committed to the common good 171 5.56 .642 .08 .33 Sensitivity, respect 172 5.48 .721 .25** .00 Ideological beliefs are appropriate to the group 173 5.28 .838 .22** .00 Confident, accepting of self 171 5.26 .777 .19* .02

ORGANIZATION Dependable, reliable 172 5.67 .648 .11 .15 Willing to accept responsibility 174 5.48 .743 .09 .25 Intelligent with practical judgment 174 5.39 .710 .05 .55 Decision-making 174 5.22 .811 .08 .30

(table continues) 88

Leadership Attributes Pearson Product Correlation Cluster n x SD r p ORGANIZATION Age Age Problem solving 174 5.20 .760 .13 .10 Time management 174 5.18 .838 .07 .36 Planning 172 5.17 .802 -.06 .43 Organizing 174 5.13 .916 .01 .92 Information management 173 4.95 .957 .12 .12

DRIVE Achievement oriented 178 5.4 .77 .07 .37 Energetic with stamina 179 5.4 .75 .18* .02 Enthusiastic, Optimistic 178 5.3 .73 .04 .65 Persistent 176 5.3 .76 .17 .03 Visionary 179 5.2 .77 .06 .42 Insightful 179 5.2 .67 .18* .02 Initiating 174 5.2 .75 .12 .14 Networking 179 5.0 .92 .08 .34 Courageous, risk taker 179 4.9 .92 .09 .27

INTERPERSONAL Motivating others 172 5.3 .65 .09 .27 Coaching 171 5.2 .67 .11 .18 Teambuilding 172 5.1 .79 .09 .25 Appropriate use of leadership styles 172 5.1 .81 .08 .28 Conflict management 172 4.9 .90 -.03 .68 Delegating 172 4.8 .85 .07 .41

TOLERANCE Communication 172 5.3 .73 .10 .20 Adaptable, open to change 172 5.2 .71 .11 .16 Even disposition 171 5.0 .91 .02 .84 Tolerant of ambiguity and complexity 172 4.9 .87 .01 .92 Stress management 172 4.8 .97 .02 .79 Tolerant of frustration 172 4.7 .90 .03 .71 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) P ≤ 0.05

Race

Spearman‟s rho was used to calculate the correlations of the leadership attributes with the categorical variable of race. The data revealed that there were no significant correlations

89 between the relationships of race with any leadership attribute in the Drive and Organization clusters. Spearman‟s rho correlation revealed a statistically significant relationship under the

Trust cluster for the leadership attribute of confident, accepting of self with the characteristic of race. This relationship indicated a positive relationship (p= .01) (Table 10) Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that the characteristic of race revealed that African-

American teachers had significantly higher mean ratings than Caucasian teachers on the leadership attribute confident, accepting of self.

A statistically significant relationship for one of the leadership attributes under the

Interpersonal cluster with the personal characteristic of race. The attribute is conflict management (p=.01) (Table 10). Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that the characteristic of race revealed that African-American teachers had significantly higher mean ratings than Caucasian teachers on the leadership attribute conflict management.

There were also two statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes under the Tolerance cluster with the characteristic race. The attributes are tolerant of ambiguity and complexity (p=.05) and stress management (p= .01) (Table 10). The data indicated negative correlations for all statistically significant relationships with the personal characteristic of race.

This does not indicate that the teacher‟s race causes a higher or lower rating on the leadership attribute any more than the leadership attributes determine a respondent‟s race. Post hoc comparisons using the Fisher LSD revealed that the characteristic of race revealed that African-

American teachers had significantly higher mean ratings than Caucasian teachers on the leadership attributes of tolerant of ambiguity and complexity and stress management.

A summary of the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the leadership attributes and the personal characteristic of race can be seen in Table 10.

Table 10

Correlations of Leadership Attributes and Personal Characteristic for Race

Leadership Attributes Spearman‟s Rho Cluster n x SD r p TRUST Race Race Ethical 172 5.7 .60 .08 .29 Personal integrity 173 5.6 .67 -.01 .90 Accountable 173 5.6 .68 .00 .98 Committed to the common good 171 5.6 .64 -.03 .67 Sensitivity, respect 172 5.5 .72 -.03 .71 Ideological beliefs are appropriate to the group 173 5.3 .84 -.01 .90 Confident, accepting of self 171 5.3 .78 -.21** .01

ORGANIZATION Dependable, reliable 172 5.7 .65 .13 .10 Willing to accept responsibility 174 5.5 .74 .05 .50 Intelligent with practical judgment 174 5.4 .71 -.00 .97 Decision-making 174 5.2 .81 -.00 .97 Problem solving 174 5.2 .76 .08 .34 Time management 174 5.2 .84 .12 .12 Planning 172 5.2 .80 .04 .60 Organizing 174 5.1 .92 .02 .78 Information management 173 5.0 .96 -.04 .60

DRIVE Achievement oriented 178 5.4 .77 .04 .63 Energetic with stamina 179 5.4 .75 .13 .11 Enthusiastic, Optimistic 178 5.3 .73 .00 .98 Persistent 176 5.3 .76 .05 .52 Visionary 179 5.2 .77 -.11 .15 Insightful 179 5.2 .67 .04 .63 Initiating 174 5.2 .75 -.02 .77 Networking 179 5.0 .92 .00 .97 Courageous, risk taker 179 4.9 .92 -.11 .17

INTERPERSONAL Motivating others 172 5.3 .65 -.00 .98 Coaching 171 5.2 .67 -.06 .43 Teambuilding 172 5.1 .79 -.10 .19 Appropriate use of leadership styles 172 5.1 .81 -.06 .46 Conflict management 172 4.9 .90 -.19* .01 Delegating 172 4.8 .85 -.14 .07

(table continues) 91

Leadership Attributes Spearman‟s Rho Cluster n x SD r p TOLERANCE Race Race Communication 172 5.3 .73 -.13 .11 Adaptable, open to change 172 5.2 .71 -.07 .37 Even disposition 171 5.0 .91 -.06 .42 Tolerant of ambiguity and complexity 172 4.9 .87 -.16* .05 Stress management 172 4.8 .97 -.20* .01 Tolerant of frustration 172 4.7 .90 -.12 .15 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) P ≤ 0.05

The last item of the survey asked the respondents to respond to an open ended request for feedback and comments. These comments can be found in Appendix J.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter provides a summary of the study, including a brief restatement of the purpose, research questions, and methodology. The chapter also provides a review of the study findings and conclusions drawn from the findings regarding the leadership of female secondary

CTE teachers in Georgia. Finally, recommendations for practice and future research are given.

Summary of the Study

Jantzi, 1999). Distributed leadership is transformational leadership in education and is defined by the influence that is exhibited by individuals at all levels rather than just the people at the top

(Leithwood, Mascall, Strauss, Sacks, Memom, & Yashkina, 2007). The concept of distributed leadership advocates decentralization of the school leader. This type of leadership suggests that every person in any position can demonstrate leadership in some way (Coleman, 2005). While this view of leadership does not mean that everyone is a leader, it presents the possibility for more fluid and emergent leadership by people at all levels rather than by fixed leadership of the people at the top (Gronn, 2000; Leithwood et al., 2007). With this understanding of distributive leadership, it is likely that more teachers will find themselves with leadership responsibilities.

While teacher leadership is not new, the recognition and expanded roles of teacher leadership and its contribution to school improvement is a new and significant focus (York-Barr & Duke,

2004). Teacher leadership is exhibited through a variety of formal and informal roles and positions. They include formal positions such as curriculum specialists and department heads

(Silva, Gimbert & Nolan, 2000; York-Barr & Duke, 2004) and informal roles such as coaching of peers and working in and leading small groups and teams (York-Barr & Duke, 2004).

Gender is an important factor in the perception of what characteristics are believed to be most important for effective teaching (Minor, Onwuegbuzie, Witcher, & James, 2002). Minor et al. (2002) suggests that the historical lack of gender consideration in schools may be indicative of female teachers desire to create a caring educational environment. Stevens, Wood, and

Sheehan (2002) propose that the male perspective of education places emphasis on rationality, order, and power over any personal and emotional attachment. Due to an existing gender bias, men are associated with showing more masculine traits that are identified with leadership, such as assertiveness, and dominance; whereas women show qualities such as compassion and are perceived less as leaders (Sanchez-Hucles & Davis, 2010). However, when women were given the opportunity to lead, their leadership resulted in positive outcomes (Oakley, 2000). Women are an underutilized resource for leadership in CTE and therefore the purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between leadership attributes, and professional characteristics and leadership attributes and personal characteristics of secondary female teachers in career and technical education programs in Georgia.

This study was guided by the following three research questions.

1. What are the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience,

educational level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future

leadership position

c. Personal characteristics included race and age

2. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and the professional

characteristics of secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Professional characteristics included: years of teaching experience, educational

level, area of teaching, location of school, and desire for future leadership

position

3. Is there a relationship between the leadership attributes and personal characteristics of

secondary female CTE teachers in Georgia?

a. Leadership attributes included the following clusters: drive, organization,

trust, tolerance, and interpersonal

b. Personal characteristics included: race and age

The web-based survey method was selected to conduct this correlational research design study. According to Muijs (2004), survey research is the most popular method of quantitative research design in social science research. Web-based surveys are cost effective because of the elimination of postal fees associated with mailed surveys and there is quick availability of data for collection. There is also anonymity of participants which leads to more realistic answers and web-based surveys eliminate the need for the manual transfer of data from the survey into an electronic format (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2007). This study used the web-based survey method due

95 to its cost-effectiveness and the researcher‟s ability to gain data quickly. The survey was delivered and data collected using the web-based platform of Survey Monkey.

For this study, the target population consisted of 1752 female secondary CTE teachers who were employed in public Georgia high schools during the 2010-2011 school year. The accessible population for this study was approximately 1197 female secondary CTE teachers with valid e-mail accounts available to the public through their school‟s website. From this accessible population a smaller group, known as a sample, was selected (Fraenkel & Wallen,

2006). Based on Krejcie and Morgan‟s (1970) sample size table, a sample size of 291 was established for this population. Fraenkel and Wallen (1990) propose that the larger the sample, the more likely it represents the population from which it was taken. Gall et al. (2007) recommend using the largest sample possible especially if the expected difference between the groups is small. Huck (2008) revealed that it is not atypical for a researcher to increase the initial sample size to compensate for anticipated low survey completion and returns. The sample size for this study was doubled. Therefore, 582 possible participants were invited to participate in the study. After two individuals opted out and 19 others had e-mails that bounced out of the e- mail queue and were deemed not accessible, there were a total of 561 teachers left in the sample.

A total of 179 female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia responded, representing 32% of the accessible sample size of 561.

Leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics were investigated because insight into these attributes and characteristics may influence the emergence of teacher leadership for female secondary CTE teachers. The Leader Attributes Inventory (LAI) developed by Moss and Johansen (1994) was designed specifically for career and technical education to assess the characteristics, skills, knowledge, and values of an individual that

96 predisposes successful leadership performance in CTE and was used as the survey instrument for this study. Jensrud (1995), one of the authors of the final version of the LAI, performed a factor analysis on the 37 attributes on the LAI and found that they can be divided into five factors that accounted for 65% of the variance. The factors are labeled as drive, organization, trust, interpersonal, and tolerance. The professional characteristics information of educational level, number of years teaching, current area of teaching, location of school, and desire for a future leadership role were requested. The personal characteristics information of race and age were also requested (Edwards & Briers, 2001; Lieberman, Saxl, & Miles, 1988; Vail, 1994).

Summary of Findings

Results of this research have practical implications for identifying potential teacher leaders, including an increased consideration for potential female leaders in career and technical education. Data analyses were based on the self ratings of leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics by 179 respondents. Respondents completed the

Leader Attributes Inventory survey instrument that was designed specifically for CTE.

Information related to professional characteristics and personal characteristics were also collected. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. A review of findings from the data is described below by research question.

The first research question was designed to provide a description of the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia. Using the descriptive statistics of frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations, and mode, it was revealed that the female secondary CTE teachers rated 12, or

32.43%, of the attributes as very descriptive of themselves and rated 25, or 67.57%, of the attributes as being somewhat descriptive to descriptive of them. The data revealed that most of

97 the respondents ranked themselves higher in the cluster of trust, with organization as the second highest ranked, the third cluster was drive, the fourth cluster was interpersonal, and the fifth and lowest ranked leadership attributes cluster was tolerance.

The two leadership attributes with the lowest ratings of “undescriptive” to “somewhat undescriptive” of respondents were courageous, risk taker, under the cluster drive, with 7.3%.

This attribute was more likely to be rated as “undescriptive” to “somewhat undescriptive” by respondents who had an average of 8.9 years teaching experience. Of those teachers rating this attribute “undescriptive” to “somewhat undescriptive,” 18.8% desired a future leadership role.

The second leadership attribute was stress management, under the cluster tolerance, with 7.8% of teachers indicating that this attribute was very “undescriptive” to “somewhat undescriptive” of themselves. This attribute was most likely to be rated lowest by those teachers who had an average of 13.3 years of teaching experience. There were 28.6% of teachers who rated this attribute as “very undescriptive” to” somewhat undescriptive” who desired a future leadership role.

The average years of teaching experience for respondents was 12.83 years with a mode of

10 years. The data revealed that the majority, 36.3%, of the respondents held a Master of

Education degree (M.Ed) and 42.5% were business education teachers. A suburban location of the school made up 41.9% of where respondents worked. There were 35.2% of the respondents who had a desire to take on a leadership role. Of those teachers who desired to pursue a higher leadership role, 27.4% of them aspire to the position of Assistant Principal. The teachers range in age from 24 years to 64 years with a mean age of 43.98 years and the mode being 54 years.

The majority, 64.8%, of respondents were Caucasian.

The second research question sought to determine the relationship between the leadership attributes and professional characteristics of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia using means, standard deviations, Pearson‟s product-moment, and Spearman‟s Rho. The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of years of teaching and educational level with any leadership attribute in the leadership attribute cluster of Tolerance.

There were also no significant correlations found with any of the leadership attributes in the categories Drive, Organization, Interpersonal, and Tolerance for the professional characteristic of educational level. Statistically significant relationships were found for energetic with stamina

(p =.019), initiating (p = .033), and courageous, risk-taker (p =.047) in the cluster Trust with the characteristic, years of teaching. A statistically significant relationship was also found in this cluster with the leadership attribute personal integrity (p = .042) and the professional characteristic, educational level. For the cluster Interpersonal, a statistically significant relationship for the leadership attribute coaching (p = .033) with the characteristic years of teaching was found. The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of location of the school and area of teaching with any leadership attribute. There were also no significant correlations found with any of the leadership attributes in the cluster

Trust for location of school, area of teaching, nor desire for future leadership role. Statistically significant relationships were revealed for visionary (p =.011), achievement oriented (p = .038), enthusiastic, optimistic (p =.039), and courageous, risk-taker (p =.015) under the leadership attribute cluster Drive with the characteristic desire for future leadership role. Three statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes of problem solving (p =.029), planning (p =

.155), intelligent with practical judgment (p =.011) under the cluster Organization with the characteristic desire for future leadership role were found. There were also three statistically

99 significant relationships for the leadership attributes delegating (p = .023), conflict management

(p = .010), and appropriate use of leadership styles (p = .014) under the cluster Interpersonal with the characteristic desire for future leadership role found. Three statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes tolerant of ambiguity and complexity (p = .014), communication (p =.030), and stress management (p = .025) under the cluster Tolerance with the characteristic desire for future leadership role were revealed.

The third research question sought to determine the relationships between the leadership attributes and personal characteristics of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia using means, standard deviations, Pearson‟s product-moment, and Spearman‟s Rho. The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of age with any leadership attribute in the leadership attribute cluster of Organization, Interpersonal, or Tolerance.

Statistically significant relationships were revealed for the leadership attributes energetic with stamina (p =.019) and insightful (p = .020) under the cluster Drive with the personal characteristic age. There were also statistically significant relationships revealed for the leadership attributes accountable (p =.013) and confident, accepting of self (p = .019) under the cluster Trust with the characteristic age. The data revealed that there were no significant correlations between the relationships of race with any leadership attribute in the leadership attribute cluster of Drive, Organization, or Trust. A statistically significant relationship for the leadership attribute conflict management (p =.013) under the cluster Interpersonal with the personal characteristic ethnicity was determined. There were also statistically significant relationships for the leadership attributes tolerant of ambiguity and complexity (p =.046) and stress management (p = .012) under the cluster Tolerance with the characteristic race.

100

The questionnaire contained an open-ended question which asked survey participants to add any additional comments regarding this study. There were 27 out of the 179 respondents who provided a response to this question. The comments had some recurrent themes which highlighted the leadership issues of female secondary career and technical education teachers.

Five respondents remarked that the survey brought to light their need for self-evaluation of their leadership attributes and the areas that they need to sharpen in order to be effective leaders. Four of the teachers offered suggestions for additional information to research such as pay, differences between the races, family stress issues, and if currently having a leadership degree or certification made a difference. There were five respondents who found this study interesting and wanted to know the results. Eleven respondents made observations about CTE that included a respondent‟s comment that there should be a focus on building the leadership capacity of females regardless of curriculum area, because the most difficult part of leadership was being female. Another comment was made that males who are less qualified often receive leadership positions/roles, especially in the secondary area. A respondent also commented that those who have worked in the business environment, before teaching, possess more leadership attributes than colleagues who have never worked in the business environment before entering the teaching profession -- male or female; while another commented that there are not enough female secondary CTE teachers.

Conclusions

Moss and Liang (1991) declared that what CTE needs is strong leadership at all levels and in all professional roles in order to achieve peak efficiency. According to Gregson and Allen

(2007), members of the National Leadership Institute identified a lack of new leaders to fill future needs as one of the overriding issues facing career and technical education. In order to

101 gain the strong leadership needed in CTE programs, Moss and Liang (1991) proposed that there has to be an assessment of existing attributes, and an identification of attributes that might be strengthened. There has to be deliberate educational interventions in order to develop leadership attributes. This development of leadership attributes has to cause CTE program educators to begin to recognize opportunities to emerge as leaders, take advantage of these opportunities and succeed as leaders in various situations and professional roles. According to Vail and Pedras

(1994), developing the capacity of leadership among teachers is one way to prepare the career and technical education field to meet the challenge of leadership.

Some teachers continue to believe that teaching and leadership are mutually exclusive.

However, this study found that 35.2% of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia surveyed have a desire to take on leadership roles. This signifies that more than a third of respondents believe that they possess the leadership attributes that predisposes them to successful leadership performance. The finding is consistent with Barth‟s (2001) research that found that many teachers see themselves exclusively as teachers and believe that leadership is the responsibility of the principal or administration. This study does show, however, that there is a group of potential leaders who believe that they have the skills needed and are ready to take the reins of leadership. These potential leaders need to have professional development opportunities available to them that prepare them in the competency areas that are expected for the leadership roles they desire. These teachers identified 21 leadership positions that they desire to have. Of those teachers who desire to pursue a leadership position, 27.4% of them aspire for an Assistant

Principal position and have an average of 13.9 years of teaching experience. Teachers who desire to lead have an average age of 41.6 years with 37.5% of them holding a Master of

Education as their highest degree and 46.2% of them teaching in a suburban area school.

102

Findings from the study revealed low negative correlation between 16, or 43%, of the leadership attributes and a desire for future leadership roles in the clusters of organization, drive, interpersonal, and tolerance. This indicates that while teachers may not have given themselves the top rating of “very descriptive” for every leadership attribute, the teachers still maintained a strong desire to be a leader. The finding is consistent with Wrushen and Sherman‟s (2008) research that found women, while being leaders, did not feel powerful, were uncomfortable describing themselves as powerful, and were underutilizing their influence. This suggests a need for professional development activities aimed at training teachers in those areas that they feel less comfortable with. Knowing that there is opportunity for development in the leadership areas may also increase their desire to lead. Leithwood et al. (2007) identified other influences that affect teachers‟ desire for leadership that may include additional resources including time for preparation and participating in a leadership role, recognition and incentives such as rewards and public acknowledgement, and clarity of the leadership role in order to avoid conflict with colleagues.

The professional characteristics of location of school and area of teaching showed absolutely no statistically significant relationships to any of the leadership attributes and therefore, deemed non-factors. Educational level of the teacher showed a statistically significant relationship to a single leadership attribute, 3%, of the 37 attributes. It was surprising that educational level resulted in a significant relationship with only one leadership attribute. As teachers are academically trained, one would feel that there are leadership development opportunities provided in the academic classes that would enhance a teacher‟s leadership attributes. It appears that this is not the case and leaves open the opportunity for the addition of professional development classes or training to take place at every degree level for CTE teachers.

103

In order to gain the strong leadership needed in CTE programs, Moss and Liang (1991) proposed an assessment of existing attributes, an identification of attributes that might be strengthened and other appropriate leadership development. There must be deliberate educational interventions in order to develop the leadership attributes. This development of leadership attributes has to cause

CTE teachers to begin to recognize opportunities to emerge as leaders, take advantage of these opportunities and succeed as leaders in various situations and professional roles.

The years of teaching experience that the respondents had indicated positive statistically significant relationships with 10, or 27%, of the 37 leadership attributes, which represents each leadership attribute cluster except for tolerance. Female secondary CTE teachers show a higher positive description of their leadership attributes as their years of teaching experience increase.

It is probable that teachers feel more comfortable with rating their leadership attributes higher when they have more years of teaching experience because these teachers have more experience and may have had to utilize these attributes at a greater rate than teachers with fewer years of experience. The findings are consistent with Vail‟s (1991) research that found that years of teaching and leadership are relevant characteristics that explain the type of leadership behaviors teachers perform and the extent teachers performed those behaviors.

While having statistically significant relationships with three, or 8%, of the 37 leadership attributes, the personal characteristic of race is a small factor in how a female secondary CTE teacher describes her leadership attributes. The personal characteristic of age also was found to be a small factor in how a female secondary CTE teacher describes her leadership attributes.

There were four, or 11%, of the 37 leadership attributes with a statistically significant relationship with the personal characteristic of age.

104

It is important to determine what leadership attributes are reflective of a successful CTE leader and to determine the leader‟s tendency to perform certain behaviors that may improve and transform an organization (Liang, Chiou, & Liou, 2001; Moss & Jensrud, 1996; Moss &

Johansen, 1991). This is also true with the female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia who participated in this study.

Recommendations

Recommendations for Practice

Based on the findings from this survey study, the following are recommendations for practice.

1. Teachers who want to pursue leadership roles need to have opportunities to explore what

positions are available and the attributes and competencies required in order to be

successful within the position. This information concerning the different leadership

positions should be a part of teacher preparation program curriculum, professional

development workshops, and as part of teacher mentoring.

2. Female teachers need to have leadership development opportunities offered in each

school so that they can hone the leadership skills that they feel they need to have some

further development in.

3. Female CTE teachers with fewer years of experience should have a purposeful mentoring

relationship with a teacher with significantly more years of experience. This mentoring

relationship will help less experienced female CTE teachers develop, not only their

ability to handle the classroom and teach, but guide them through the development of the

different leadership attributes and professional competencies they need in order to be

successful leaders as they gain additional years of teaching experience..

105

Recommendations for Research

Based on the findings from this study, the following are recommendations for further research:

1. It is recommended that a replication of this study be conducted comparing male and

female secondary CTE teachers to determine any similarities and differences. If there are

differences there should be a determination as to what they are and what the differences

may mean.

2. Conduct a study to determine if a female secondary CTE teacher‟s desire to enter a

leadership role is related to other characteristics that were not examined in this research,

such as the relationship between the desire to lead and age; the desire to lead and years

of teaching experience; and the desire to lead and knowledge and clarity of leadership

roles. If relationships are revealed, determine where they exist and further explore their

meaning.

3. Conduct a study to compare how female secondary CTE teachers in leadership roles rate

themselves on the Leader Attributes Inventory prior to professional development with

how they rate themselves after professional development. This information may produce

useful findings in a leader‟s perception of their own leadership style before and after

professional development training.

Summary

This study was designed to examine the relationship between leadership attributes and professional characteristics and leadership attributes and personal characteristics of female secondary teachers in CTE programs in Georgia. As a result of conducting this web-based survey research study, it is hopeful that the findings are used to delve further into the dynamics

106 of leadership of female secondary CTE teachers, especially those with a desire to pursue leadership roles. By investigating female teachers‟ leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics, school and CTE leaders can develop and implement a plan to assist these teachers in not only attaining, but also thriving in, their leadership roles.

107

REFERENCES

Ackerman, R., & Mackenzie, S.V. (2006). Uncovering teacher leadership. Educational

Leadership, 63(8), 66-70.

Avolio, B.J., Bass, B.M., & Jung, D.I. (1999). Re-examining the components of

transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441-462.

Barth, R. S. (2001). Teacher leader. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(6), 443-449.

Bass, B.M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, & managerial

applications. (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Berry, B., Johnson, D., & Montgomery, D. (2005). The power of teacher leadership.

Educational Leadership, 62(5), 56-60.

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Burns, G. & Martin, B.N. (2010). Examination of the effectiveness of male and female

educational leaders who made use of the invitational leadership style of leadership.

Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice (16) 29-55.

Catalyst (2010). www.catalyst.org/publication/206/women-in-us-managment.

Coleman, M. (2003). Gender and the orthodoxies of leadership. School leadership and

Management, 23(3) 325-339.

Coleman, M. (2005). Gender and secondary school leadership. Gender Issues in Leadership,

33(2), 3-20.

108

Danielson, C. (2007). The many faces of leadership. Educational Leadership, 65(1),

14-19.

Dansereau, F., Graen, G. G., & Haga, W. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership

in formal organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78.

Den Hartog, D.N., House, R.J., Hnages, P.J., et al. (1999). Culture specific and cross culturally

generalizable, implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational

leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10(2) 219-256.

Dillman, D.A. ( 2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. New

Jersey: Wiley.

Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D., & Christian, L.M. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode

surveys: The tailored design method. New Jersey: Wiley.

Donaldson, G.A. (2007). What do teachers bring to leadership? Educational Leadership,

65(1), 26-29.

Dozier, T.K. (2007). Turning good teachers into great leaders. Educational Leadership,

65(1), 54-58.

Dubinsky, A.J., Yammarino, F.J., & Jolson, M.A. (1995). An examination of linkages

between personal characteristics and dimensions of transformational leadership. Journal

of Business and Psychology, 9(3) 315-335.

Dunbar, D.P. & Kinnersley, R.T. (2011). Mentoring female administrators toward leadership s

uccess. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin. 17-24

Edwards, M.C., & Briers, G.E. (2001). Selected variables related to expected longevity

in teaching on entry-phase agriculture teachers. Journal of Career and Technical

Education, 18(1).

109

Ettlinger, M. (2008). Challenges facing American workers. Committee on Ways and

Means Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support. United States House of

Representatives.

Evans, M.G. (1970). The effects of supervisory behavior on the path-goal relationship.

Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 277-298.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. New

York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Fullan, M. (1996). Leadership for change. In Leithwood, K.A., Chapman, J., Corson, P.,

Hallinger, P., Hart, A. (Eds.) pp. 701-722. International Handbook of Educational

Leadership and Administration. Netherlands: Kuiwer Adcademic.

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W.R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction.

(8th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Galland, C. (2008). Effective teacher leadership: A quantitative study of the relationship

between school structures and effective teacher leaders. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.

Gloeckner, G. W., Gliner, J. A., Tochterman, S. M., & Morgan, G. A. (2001). Assessing validity

and reliability for data collection instruments. In E. I. Farmer & J.W. Rojewski, (Eds.),

Research pathways: Writing professional papers, theses, and dissertations in workforce

education (pp. 223-246). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Graen, G. B. & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations:

A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp.

143-166). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

110

Gregson, J.A., & Allen, J.M., (2007). Leadership in career and technical education:

Beginning the 21st century. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 44(4) retrieved on

November 3, 2008, from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v44n4/gregson.html.

Harris, A. (2002). Improving schools through teacher leadership. Education Journal,

59, 22-23.

Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership as distributed leadership: heresy, fantasy or possibility?

School Leadership and Management, 23(3) 313-324.

Hemphill, J. K. and Coons, A. E. (1957). "Development of the leader behavior

description questionnaire." In Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement.

Stogdill, R. M., & Coons, A. E. (eds.) Columbus, OH: Bureau of Business Research of

Ohio State University.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. (1969). Life-cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development

Journal, 23, 26-34.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. (1982). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing

human resources. 3rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

House, R.J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly,

16, 321-328.

House, R.J. & Dessler, G. (1974). The path-goal theory of leadership: Some post hot and a priori

tests. In J. Hunt & L. Larson (Eds.), Contingency approaches in leadership (pp. 29-55).

Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Huberty, C., & Petoskey, M. (1999, January 1). Use of multiple correlation analysis and

multiple regression analysis. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 24(1), 15-43.

Huck, S.W. (2008). Reading statistics and research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

111

Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management

Science, 28(3), 315-336.

Jensrud, Q. T. (1995). The effects of rater and leader gender on ratings of leader

attributes and effectiveness. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Minnesota, Twin

Cities, MN.

Kezar, A.J., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the “L” word in

higher education: The revolution of research on leadership. ASHE Higher Education

Report 31(6), 1-207.

Klenke, K. (1996). Women and leadership: A contextual perspective. New York: Springer

Publishing Company, Inc.

Knopick, M.S. & Moerer, T. (2010). Women leaders and entrepreneurs: implications for the

classroom. European Journal of Social Sciences 14(3) 394-403.

Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2002). The Leadership Challenge. (3rd Ed.) San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Krishnaveni, R., & Anitha, J. (2007). Educators‟ professional characteristics. Quality

Assurance in Education, 15(2), 149-161.

Krueger, P. E. (2001). Determining appropriate sample size. In E. I. Farmer & J. W. Rojewski

(Eds.), Research pathways. Writing professional papers, theses, and dissertations in

workforce education (pp. 248-258). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Lanier, J.E. & Sedlack, M.W. (1989). Teacher efficacy and quality schooling. In

Sergiovanni, T.J., & Moore, J.H. (Eds.), (p. 118-147), Schooling for tomorrow: Directing

reforms to issues that count. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

112

Leithwood, K.A. (1992). The move toward transformational leadership. Educational

Leadership, 49(5), 8-12.

Leithwood, K. & Jantzi, D. (1999). Transformational school leadership: A replication. School

Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(4). 451-479.

Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007).

Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system.

Leadership and Policy in Schools, (6), 37-67.

Lieberman, A., Saxl, E. R., & Miles, M. B. (1988). Teacher leadership: Ideology and

practice. In Lieberman, A. (Ed.), (p. 148-166). Building a professional culture in schools.

New York: Teachers College Press.

Loder, T.L. & Spillane, J.P. (2005). Is a principal still a teacher? US women administrators‟

accounts of role conflict and role discontinuity. School Leadership and Management,

25(3), 263-279.

Lusch, R.F. & O'Brien, M. (1997). Fostering professionalism, Marketing Research, 9(1),

24-30.

Marks, H. M. & Printy, S.M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An

integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration

Quarterly 39 (3), 370-397

Minor, L.C., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Witcher, A.E., & James, T.L. (2002). Preservice teachers

educational beliefs and their perceptions of characteristics of effective teachers, The

Journal of Educational Research, 96(2), 116-127.

Moore, D.S. (2007) The basic practices of statistics. (4th ed.) New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and

Company.

113

Moss, J., & Jensrud, Q., (1996). Leader attributes inventory: Directions for

administering, scoring, and preparing individualized feedback reports. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED401452)

Moss, J. Jr., & Johansen, B. (1991). Conceptualizing leadership and assessing leader

attributes. Berkley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

Moss, J., Jr., Lambrect, J., Jensrud, Q., & Finch, C. (1994). Leader attributes inventory

manual. Berkley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED374337)

Moss, J., Jr., & Liang, T. (1990). Leadership, leadership development, and the National

Center for Research in Vocational Education. Berkley, CA: National Center for

Research in Vocational Education.

Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London: Sage

Publications.

Muijs, D. & Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership – improvement through

empowerment? Educational Management & Administration, 31(4), 437-448.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). Student participation in CTE: 2005. Alexandria,

VA: Author. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes/tables/index.asp?LEVEL=

SECONDARY

National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). Public school teachers of CTE. Alexandria, VA:

Author. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes/tables/index.asp?LEVEL=

SECONDARY

114

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A Nation at Risk: The

Imperative for Educational Reform. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of

Education.

National Conference of State Legislatures (2010, April 7). National unemployment

summary. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid=13307.

Northouse, P.G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and Practice (3rd Ed.).Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publications.

Phelps, P.H. (2008). Helping teachers become leaders. Clearing House: A Journal of

Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81(3), 119-122.

Ricketts, J.C., & Rudd, R.D. (2002). A comprehensive leadership education model to

train, teach, and develop leadership in youth. Journal of Career and Technical Education,

19 (1).

Roby, D.E. (2009). Teacher leadership skills: An analysis of communication apprehension.

Education, 129(4), 608-614.

Sabatini, E.M. (2002). Teacher’s perspectives of emergent teacher leadership in an

elementary school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Georgia.

Sanchez-Hucles, J. V. & Davis, D. D. (2010). Women and women of color in leadership.

American Psychologist, 65(3), 171-181.

Selm, M.V., & Jankowski, N. W. (2006). Conducting online surveys. Quality & Quantity,

40, 435-456.

Shaefer, D.R. & Dillman, D.A. (1998). Development of a standard e-mail methodology. Public

Opinion Quarterly. (62)378-397.

115

Shannon, D.M., Johnson, T.E., Searcy, S., & Lott, A. (2002). Using electronic surveys:

advice from survey professionals. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(1).

Silva, D.Y., Gimbert, R., & Nolan, J. (2000). Sliding the doors: Locking and unlocking

possibilities for teacher leadership. Teachers College Record, 102(4), 779-804.

Snell, J. & Swanson, J. (2000). The essential knowledge and skills of teacher leaders: A

search for conceptual framework. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American

Education Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Spillane, J.P. (2005). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum. 69(2) 143-150.

Stevens, E., Wood, G.H., & Sheehan, J.J. (2002). Justice, ideology, education: An introduction

to the social foundations of education (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of the literature, New York:

Free Press.

Tewel, K.J. (1994). The transition period in restructuring high schools: Teachers as

leaders. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas,

67(6)331-336.

The Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative

for educational reform. Washington, D.C.

Timperley, H.S. (2005). Distributed leadership: developing theory from practice. Journal of

Curriculum Studies, 37(4) 395-420.

Topp, N.W., & Pawloski, B. (2002). Online data collection. Journal of Science Education

and Technology, 11(2), 173-178.

U.S. Department of Education. (2008). ww2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/cte/factsh/career-

clstrs- prgrms-study-fs080528qa-kc.doc - 2008-10-09

116

Vail, A. (1991). Predictors of leadership behaviors of vocational and non-vocational

teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Ohio

Vail, A., & Pedras, M.J. (1994). Predictors of teacher leadership for trade

and industry teachers. Paper presented at the American Vocational Association

Convention, Dallas, TX.

Vail, A., & Redick, S. (1993). Predictors of teacher leadership performance

of vocational and nonvocational teachers. Journal of Vocational Education Research,

18(1), 51-76. van Eeden, R., Cilliers, F., & van Deventer, V. (2008). Leadership styles and associated

personality traits: Support for the conceptualization of transactional and transformational

leadership. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(2), pp.253-267.

White, R. (2008). The role of CTE in developing the next generation of leaders.

Techniques, 83(1), 62.

Wrushen, B.R. & Sherman, W.H. (2008). Women secondary school principals: multicultural

voices from the field. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, (21)5,

457-469.

York-Barr, J. & Duke, D. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Finding s

from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255-316.

Yukl, G. A. (1981). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Zaccaro, S. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist,

62(1), 6-16.

117

APPENDIX A

LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES INVENTORY

118

LEADER ATTRIBUTES INVENTORY

SECTION A

There are thirty-seven (37) leader attributes with statements. The statements are intended to help clarify the meaning of the attributes and do not reflect a complete definition of the attributes. You are asked to rate each leader attribute to the degree you perceive each to be very undescriptive to very descriptive of yourself..

The attributes begins below. Please respond to each item by circling the number representing your choice following each attribute.

Rate each statement using the following scale:

 Very Undescriptive  Somewhat Descriptive  Undescriptive  Descriptive  Somewhat Undescriptive  Very Descriptive

119

ATTRIBUTES

Descriptive

Undescriptive

Very Very Descriptive

Very Very Undescriptive Somewhat Descriptive Somewhat

Undescriptive Somewhat

1. Energetic with stamina – Approaches tasks with great energy and       work long hours when necessary 2. Insightful – Reflects on the relationship among events and grasp       the meaning of complex issues 3. Adaptable, open to change – Encourages and accepts suggestions       and constructive criticism from coworkers, and am willing to consider modifying plans 4. Visionary – Looks to the future and creates new ways in which the       organization can prosper 5. Tolerant of ambiguity and complexity – Comfortably handles       vague and difficult situations where there is no simple answer or no prescribed method of proceeding 6. Achievement-oriented – Shows commitment to achieving goals and       strive to keep improving performance 7. Accountable – Holds self answerable for work and willingly admit       mistakes 8. Initiating – Frequently introduces new ideas       9. Confident, accepting of self – Appears secure about abilities and       recognizes personal shortcomings 10. Willing to accept responsibility – Willingly assumes higher-level       duties and functions within the organization 11. Persistent – Continues to act on beliefs despite unexpected       difficulties 12. Enthusiastic, optimistic – Thinks positively, approaches new       tasks with excitement, and deals with challenges as opportunities 13. Tolerant of frustration – Acts calmly and patiently even when       things don‟t go as planned

120

ATTRIBUTES

Descriptive

Undescriptive

Very Very Descriptive

Very Very Undescriptive Somewhat Descriptive Somewhat

Undescriptive Somewhat

14. Dependable, reliable – Can be counted on to follow through to       get the job done 15. Courageous, risk-taker – Willingly tries out new ideas in spite of       possible loss or failure 16. Even disposition – Displays a sense of humor and a stable       temperament even in stressful situations 17. Committed to the common good – Works to benefit the entire       organization, not just self 18. Personal integrity – Speaks frankly and honestly and practices       espoused values 19. Intelligent with practical judgment – Learn quickly, and knows       how and when to apply knowledge 20. Ethical – Acts consistently with principles of fairness and right or       good conduct that can stand the test of close public scrutiny 21. Communication (listening, oral, written) – Listens closely to       people at work, and organizes and clearly presents information, both orally and in writing 22. Sensitivity, respect – Shows genuine concern for the feelings of       others and regard for them as individuals 23. Motivating others – Creates an environment in which people want       to do their best 24. Networking – Develops cooperative relationships within and       outside of the organization 25. Planning – In collaboration with others, develops tactics and       strategies for achieving organizational objectives 26. Delegating – Appropriately and effectively assigns responsibility       and authority 27. Organizing – Establishes effective and efficient procedures for       getting work done in an orderly manner 28. Team-building – Facilitates the development of cohesiveness and       cooperation among the people at work 29. Coaching – Helps people develop knowledge and skills for their       work assignments 30. Conflict management – Brings conflict into the open and uses it to       arrive at constructive solutions 31. Time management – Schedules own work activities so that       deadlines are met and work goals are accomplished in a timely manner 32. Stress management – Effectively deals with the tension of high      

121 pressure work situations 33. Appropriate use of leadership styles – Uses a variety of       approaches to influence and lead others 34. Ideological beliefs are appropriate to the group – Models and       demonstrates belief in the basic values of the organization 35. Decision-making – Makes timely decisions that are in the best       interest of the organization by analyzing all available information, distilling key points, and drawing relevant conclusions 36. Problem-solving – Effectively identifies, analyzes, and resolves       difficulties and uncertainties at work 37. Information management – I identify, collect, organize, and       analyze the essential information needed by the organization

SECTION B PROFESSIONAL CHARACTERISTICS

Please respond to the following items pertaining to professional characteristics by choosing the answers that best represents you.

1. What is your current area of teaching? Agriculture Healthcare Sciences Business Education Marketing Education Engineering & Technology Technology Education Family & Consumer Science

2. Are you currently in a teacher leadership role beyond your classroom?

Yes No

3. If "yes", please identify the area most closely related to your teacher leadership role. Mark all that apply:

Student organization advisor Shaping the curriculum Designing staff development and in-service Evaluating teacher performance programs Selecting new teachers Coaching, Athletics Setting standards for student behavior Setting promotion and retention policies Selecting new administrators Deciding school budgets Deciding whether students are tracked Choosing textbooks and instructional materials into special classes Other (please specify)

122

4. Have you given serious consideration to pursuing a leadership role higher than what you are currently responsible for?

No Yes If "Yes" what position?

5. How many years of teaching experience do you have?

6. Education (Highest degree earned as of today)

Bachelor's Specialist M.Ed Ed.D MAT Ph.D Master's (Other)

7. Geographical location of your school:

Rural Suburban Urban

SECTION C PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS

Please provide the following information by checking the appropriate space.

1. What is your age as of today?

2. Ethnic Group (OPTIONAL):

African American/Black Caucasian/White Asian Hispanic Other (please specify)

3. What comments/feedback do you have concerning this study on leadership attributes for female CTE secondary teachers?

123

APPENDIX B

LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES – FIVE FACTORS

124

LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES – FIVE FACTORS

Leadership Attributes – Five factors or Clusters

Drive Organization Trust Interpersonal Tolerance

Initiating Time Ethical Delegating Tolerant of Management Frustration

Visionary Organizing Personal Team Building Even Disposition Integrity

Enthusiastic, Dependable, Committed to the Appropriate Use Stress Optimistic Reliable Common Good of Leadership Management Styles Energetic with Information Sensitivity, Coaching Adaptable, Open Stamina Management Respect to Change

Courageous, Intelligent with Accountable Motivating Tolerant of Risk-Taker Practical Others Ambiguity and Judgment complexity Achievement Willingness to Ideological Conflict Communication Oriented Accept Beliefs are Management Responsibility Appropriate to the group Networking Decision Making Confident, Accepting of Self Insightful Planning

Persistent Problem Solving

125

APPENDIX C

CRONBACH‟S ALPHA

126

CRONBACH‟S ALPHA

Cronbach‟s Alpha for the five leadership clusters Cluster x SD Α Drive 5.5 .78 .853 Interpersonal 5.1 .78 .812 Organization 5.3 .80 .854 Tolerance 5.2 .85 .863 Trust 5.6 .70 .828 Note: Cronbach‟s alpha for all 37 leadership attributes= .960

127

APPENDIX D

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) APPROVAL

128

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) APPROVAL

 -

4/19/11

Reply ▼ Chris Joseph Add to contacts To Bettye P Smith, [email protected] From: Chris Joseph ([email protected]) Sent: Tue 4/19/11 9:58 PM To: Bettye P Smith ([email protected]) Cc: [email protected] ([email protected]) PROJECT NUMBER: 2011-10794-0

TITLE OF STUDY: An examination of the relationships...

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Dr. Smith

Dear Bettye and Tedra,

The University of Georgia Institutional Review Board (IRB) has approved the above-titled human research application that was reviewed by the Exempt 2 review procedure. You may now begin this study. Your approval packet will be sent by campus mail.

Please be reminded that any changes to this research proposal can only be initiated after review and approval by the IRB (except when necessary to eliminate apparent immediate hazards to the research participant). Any adverse events or unanticipated problems must be reported to the IRB immediately. The principal investigator is also responsible for maintaining all applicable protocol records (regardless of media type) for at least three (3) years after completion of the study (i.e., copy of approved protocol, raw data, amendments, correspondence, and other pertinent documents). Any HIPAA-related research documents must be retained for a minimum of six (6) years. You are requested to notify the Human Subjects Office if your study is completed or terminated.

Good luck with this study, and please feel free to contact us if you have any questions. Please use the IRB project number and title in all communications regarding this study.

Chris A. Joseph, Ph.D. Department of Anthropology University of Georgia Athens, GA 30602

[email protected]

129

APPENDIX E

LETTER REQUESTING PERMISSION TO USE THE INSTRUMENT

130

LETTER REQUESTING PERMISSION TO USE THE INSTRUMENT

Tedra Haynes White 248 Holliday Overlook Villa Rica, GA 30180

Dr. Jerome Moss Professor Emeritus Work and Human Resource Education University of Minnesota

Dear Dr. Moss:

Please accept this letter as a request for permission to use the self-rating form of the Leader Attributes Inventory in my doctoral research. The title of my dissertation is “An Examination of the Relationships Between Leadership Attributes, Professional Characteristics, and Personal Characteristics of CTE teachers in Georgia.” This research study will also include information that will be obtained from the participants using a self-created professional and personal data questionnaire. The purpose of the study will be to determine if significant relationships exist between leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and the personal characteristics of CTE teachers in Georgia.

My doctoral work is directed by Dr. Bettye P. Smith, Workforce Education, at the University of Georgia, as well as a committee comprised of two other faculty members within the department. I am requesting permission to reproduce the self-rating form of the LAI as a part of the questionnaire packet which will be posted to the web-based survey platform Survey Monkey.

Your response to this request may be emailed to me at [email protected]. I plan to begin data collection in November 2010. Thank you for your assistance and I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Tedra Haynes White Graduate Student The University of Georgia

131

APPENDIX F

LETTER GRANTING PERMISSION TO USE THE INSTRUMENT

132

LETTER GRANTING PERMISSION TO USE THE INSTRUMENT

Jerome Moss [email protected]

From: Jerome Moss ([email protected]) Sent: Wed 4/28/10 5:41 PM To: Tedra H. White ([email protected])

Dear Tedra, You have my permission to use the LAI in your doctoral research. Good luck!! Please give my regards to your Committee members. Jerry Moss

133

APPENDIX G

FIRST EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE WITH PARTICIPANTS

134

FIRST EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE WITH PARTICPANTS

To: GA CTE Teachers

From: Tedra H. White Doctoral Student – University of Georgia

Dr. Bettye P. Smith Professor – University of Georgia

I am conducting a statewide study exploring the relationships between the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics of female secondary Career Technical Agriculture Education (CTE) teachers in Georgia. You are being contacted because you have been identified as a female CTE teacher in the state.

I have attached a link (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CTEfemaleteacherleadership) for you to participate in the survey regarding leadership attributes and the degree to which you perceive each to be descriptive of yourself. As an educator, I know that your time is very valuable and that you are busy. However, your participation is crucial in collecting accurate data for this study.

If you have questions or concerns, please contact me by email ([email protected]) or Dr. Bettye P. Smith ([email protected]).

If you have any questions about the rights of research subjects or research-related injury, please contact the University of Georgia‟s Human Subjects Office at 706-542-3199, Fax 706-542-3360, or e-mail [email protected], or regular mail at: University of Georgia, 629 Boyd G.S.R.C., Athens, GA 30602-7411

Thank you in advance.

Tedra H. White

135

APPENDIX H

FOLLOW-UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS

136

FOLLOW-UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS

To: GA CTE Teachers

From: Tedra H. White Doctoral Student – University of Georgia

Dr. Bettye P. Smith Professor – University of Georgia

Dear GA CTE teacher,

About one week ago, an email was sent to you requesting your participation in a study exploring the relationships between the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics of female secondary CTE teachers in Georgia. If you have already completed the online questionnaire, thank you for your participation. If you have not, I ask that you please click on the link below and complete the questionnaire. https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CTEfemaleteacherleadership.

As an educator, I know that your time is very valuable and that you are busy. However, your responses are extremely vital to this research survey regarding leadership attributes and the degree to which you perceive each to be descriptive of yourself.

If you have questions or concerns, please contact me by email ([email protected]) or Dr. Bettye P. Smith ([email protected]).

Thank you.

Tedra H. White

137

APPENDIX I

FINAL FOLLOW-UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS

138

FINAL FOLLOW-UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS

To: GA CTE Teachers

From: Tedra H. White Doctoral Student – University of Georgia

Dr. Bettye P. Smith Professor – University of Georgia

Dear GA CTE teacher,

About two weeks ago, an email was sent to you requesting your participation in a study exploring the relationships between the leadership attributes, professional characteristics, and personal characteristics of female secondary CTE teachers in select program areas in Georgia. If you have already completed the online questionnaire, thank you for your participation. If you have not, I ask that you please click on the link below and complete the questionnaire.

If you have questions or concerns, please contact me by email ([email protected]) or Dr. Bettye P. Smith ([email protected]).

Thank you.

Tedra H. White

139

APPENDIX J

PARTICIPANTS OPEN ENDED FEEDBACK AND COMMENTS

140

PARTICIPANTS OPEN ENDED FEEDBACK AND COMMENTS

1. There are many hours spent with students in relation to CTSO's. Teachers are required to

spend a minimum of 20 hours beyond the school day each month working with students

and attending conferences, community service projects, etc...

2. Go for it!!!

3. It is easier today than 20 years ago.

4. My answers were based on 27 years of teaching.

5. You must motivate students and teachers to work together and to their fullest potential.

6. Female teachers do the work while male teachers take credit.

7. We need to focus on building the leadership capacity of females, regardless of curriculum

area. Recently, a female associate superintendent shared with me that the most difficult

part of leadership was being female. She explained that males who are less qualified

often receive leadership positions/roles, especially in the secondary area.

8. We balance work and home/family and still look good doing so.

9. If you can't roll with the punches you are in the wrong place. You have to be willing to

learn new things and "change it up" to be certain your students are engaged or you are not

effective.

10. Before entering education, I worked in the business environment for 30 years. A

colleague has also left the business environment after 25 years and entered the teaching

profession. My observations are that she, I and others who have worked in the business

environment before teaching possess more leadership attributes than our colleagues who

141

have never worked in the business environment before entering the teaching profession --

male or female .

11. This questionnaire made me take a closer look at my leadership skills in the classroom

and among my colleagues. I can honestly say there are areas where I need to develop

stronger skills: organization and conflict management.

12. pay was not asked

13. I would be very interested in the results from your findings.

14. ALL Students need career exploratory classes and should be included in every student's

high school experience.

15. This survey made me more aware of areas that I need to sharpen, in order to be a more

effective leader.

16. You might want to see who already holds a leadership degree and certificate. I currently

have a Specialist Degree in Leadership and hold a current GA leadership certificate.

17. I am currently getting my Master's degree in teacher leadership.

18. Great idea to identify leadership attributes

19. Might need to add something about how family stress impacts work as well.....ex: sick

child, unsupportive husband, elderly parents, etc...

20. This was beneficial for me to see what areas I need to continue to work to improve.

21. It would have been nice to know how the results of this information is being used, i.e. a

thesis or dissertation, so we can look for your study results. I was surprised the survey did

not include a question regarding membership in professional associations... just food for

thought.

22. great self analysis!

142

23. Dig deeper--include female race in CTE leadership attributes (similarities and differences

and why)

24. THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH OF US.

25. I would love to know what conclusions you draw from the information collected!

26. Interesting questions - made me think about my personal qualities and what I need to

work on.

27. I think it is a very interesting idea.

143