IMPACT OF CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES OF ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS

Linda Davis Meyerson B.A., Texas Wesleyan University, Fort Worth, Texas, 1972 M.A., California State University, Fresno, 1996

DISSERTATION

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

in

EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

at

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO

SPRING 2012

Copyright © 2012 Linda Davis Meyerson All rights reserved

ii

IMPACT OF CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES OF ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS

A Dissertation

by

Linda Davis Meyerson

Approved by Dissertation Committee:

Frank Lilly, Ph.D., Chair

Edmund W. Lee, Ed.D.

Jana Noel, Ph.D.

SPRING 2012

iii

IMPACT OF CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES OF ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS

Student: Linda Davis Meyerson

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this dissertation is suitable for shelving in the library and credit is to be awarded for the dissertation.

, Department Chair Caroline S. Turner, Ph.D./Professor Date

iv

DEDICATION

This study is dedicated to my Mom and Dad who felt my brother and me were their most prized possessions. Their work ethic and determination to overcome the challenges life offered set the example for me to know that all things are possible with dedication, determination, pride and hard work.

This study is also dedicated to Jonathan and Matthew Meyerson. My hope is that

I have effectively modeled the importance of education, diligence, and the attainment of personal goals.

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study could not be completed without the support from those who inspired me to continue with my dreams even when times were difficult. I would like to convey my most sincere appreciation and thanks to my husband, Jerry, for always believing in my successes. The time that I spent on continuing with my education was made possible by his understanding and support. Throughout the process, he never questioned my success in completion.

I would like to thank my family, especially my brother Bill for his continued support and help with making and correcting the endless charts and statistics. A special thanks go to my close friends who have heard far more than they ever wanted about my journey to completion. Your patience and understanding has helped me through the process.

Thank you also goes to my chair, Dr. Frank Lilly, for believing in me from our first day together. To my former co-administrators from Elk Grove Unified School

District, thank you for leading the way in demonstrating how to embrace challenges and overcome obstacles. Thank you to the principals who allowed me to enter their halls and watch their tremendously effective administrative skills in touching the lives of each person with whom they shared their day.

Last but not least, thank you to my classmates for your unending support. The support and friendship of so many through this process has been essential to my soul.

vi

CURRICULUM VITAE

Education Doctor of Education, Administration and Supervision, California State University, Sacramento, 2012 Administrative Service Credential, California State University, Sacramento, 2012 The Art and Craft of the Principalship, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Boston, MA, 2004 Master of Arts, Curriculum and Instruction, California State University, Fresno, 1995 Bachelor of Arts, English, Texas Wesleyan University, 1972

Professional Employment Elk Grove Unified School District 2011 – 2012, Sacramento County Office of Education Leadership Academy 2006 – 2011, Director, Elementary Education 2001 – 2006, Principal, Dillard Elementary School 1999 – 2001, Vice Principal, Clovis High School, Fresno, California 1997 – 1999, Vice Principal, Valley Oak Elementary, Fresno, California 1989 – 1997, Classroom teacher, Fresno, California Fort Worth Independent School District 1973 – 1983, Classroom teacher, Fort Worth, Texas

Fields of Study Educational Leadership Educational Administration K-12 Education

vii

Abstract

of

IMPACT OF CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES OF ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS

By

Linda Davis Meyerson

The transformation of schools is a common theme in public policy on school education in many nations. Some are in response to immediate concerns about the level of student achievement, for example in the publicized findings on the California

Department of Education website, 2011. With the realization that different approaches to schooling are needed for individual and societal success in a knowledge economy, the task to lead transformation of schools is seen as a complex and challenging endeavor.

Many school systems and school principals seem energized by the transformation of current systems and are looking forward to new standards and identifying strategies to achieve better outcomes of success with students.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether and to what degree elementary school principals exhibiting successful leadership characteristics within their school sites and communities exhibit higher levels of cultural intelligence. The study used three specific instruments to gather the data combining both qualitative and quantitative approaches in the collection. The quantitative data was collected from the use of a 20-item four-factor Cultural Intelligence Scale. Additional qualitative data was

viii

collected from a one-on-one interview and an ethnographic field study where each principal participant was observed. The study included the quantitative measurement of

39 principals in one school district and five qualitative case studies of randomly selected principals from the 12 who demonstrated successful principal leadership within the school site.

Findings from this study revealed the 34 principal leaders possessed above mean averages for levels of cultural intelligence as indicated on the quantitative Cultural

Intelligence Scale. Further, the findings indicated that the five randomly selected and deemed exceptionally effective principals not only scored higher than the 34 original leaders, but they were also aware of and used their cultural intelligence in their daily interactions with community, students, and staff. The five selected individuals demonstrated behaviors aligning with the high levels of cultural intelligence.

The concluding information of the study indicates that effective principals do possess higher levels of measured and observable cultural intelligence. Evidence also indicates that the effective principals are aware of these levels of cultural intelligence and use this awareness to improve their interactions with individuals from diverse cultures.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Dedication ...... v

Acknowledgments...... vi

Curriculum Vitae ...... vii

List of Tables ...... xiii

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Background ...... 1

Statement of the Problem ...... 5

Nature and Purpose of the Study ...... 7

Research Questions ...... 8

Conceptual Framework and Theories ...... 9

Operational Definitions ...... 14

Assumptions, Limitations, Scope and Delimitations ...... 16

The Significance of the Study ...... 18

Conclusion ...... 19

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 21

Introduction ...... 21

Theoretical Research and Literature ...... 23

Background Contributions from Cognitive Psychology ...... 24

x

Cultural Contributions of Anthropology ...... 31

The Background of Intelligence Testing...... 34

Current Studies of Cultural Intelligence ...... 34

Cultural Intelligence Theory ...... 36

Effective Leadership Practices of School Principals ...... 41

Summary ...... 45

3. METHODOLOGY ...... 47

Introduction ...... 47

Research Questions ...... 48

Population and Sampling ...... 50

Data Collection Procedures ...... 53

Instrumentation ...... 55

Research Design...... 60

Data Analysis ...... 63

4. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ...... 65

Introduction ...... 65

Quantitative Data Analysis ...... 68

Qualitative Data Analysis ...... 78

Summary ...... 113

5. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 117

Overview of the Study ...... 117

xi

Theory of Cultural Intelligence ...... 122

Interpretation of the Findings...... 123

Limitations ...... 129

Contributions and Transformational Leadership ...... 130

Educational Policy and Practice ...... 132

Data-driven Decision Making ...... 136

Implications of the Study ...... 138

Recommendations for Further Study ...... 143

Conclusion ...... 143

6. APPENDICES

Appendix A. Cultural Intelligence Survey ...... 146

Appendix B. Consent Forms ...... 147

Appendix C. Cultural Intelligence Principal Interview ...... 149

Appendix D. Chart of Observations...... 152

REFERENCES ...... 154

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Table 1 School Demographics for Principal A ...... 80

2. Table 2 School Demographics for Principal B ...... 82

3. Table 3 School Demographics for Principal C ...... 83

4. Table 4 School Demographics for Principal D ...... 84

5. Table 5 School Demographics for Principal E ...... 85

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Figure 1 Ethnic Representation of Northern California School District ...... 68

2. Figure 2 CQS Mean Scores of Thirty-nine Principals ...... 70

3. Figure 3 Overall Cultural Intelligence Inventory Score by Selected Principal ...... 71

4. Figure 4 Motivational Intelligence Subgroup Results ...... 73

5. Figure 5 Behavioral Subgroup Results ...... 74

6. Figure 6 Metacognitive Subgroup Results ...... 76

7. Figure 7 Cognitive Subgroup Results ...... 77

8. Figure 8 Student Ethnicity Representation at School A ...... 81

9. Figure 9 Student Ethnicity Representation at School B ...... 82

10. Figure 10 Student Ethnicity Representation at School C ...... 83

11. Figure 11 Student Ethnicity Representation at School D ...... 84

12. Figure 12 Student Ethnicity Representation at School E ...... 86

13. Figure 13 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal A ...... 108

14. Figure 14 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal B ...... 108

15. Figure 15 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal C ...... 110

16. Figure 16 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal D ...... 110

17. Figure 17 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal E ...... 111

18. Figure 18 High School Graduation Rates by Ethnicity, 2007-08 ...... 134

19. Figure 19 Percentage of Students Deemed “Ready for College” by Ethnicity ...... 135

xiv

20. Figure 20 English/Language Arts CST ...... 138

21. Figure 21 Math CST ...... 139

22. Figure 22 School-aged Children by Race Projection ...... 140

xv 1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background

Job descriptions detailing the responsibilities of elementary school principals today bear little resemblance to those of earlier generations. The 21st-century principal wears a multitude of hats throughout the average school day. While he may begin the day in the office as a disciplinarian, he may go on to perform accounting, custodial, instructional, and nursing duties before returning to his office where a mountain of paperwork awaits. Regardless of everyone’s differing opinions of him as a leader, the primary focus of the elementary school principal is not the tasks he faces daily, but rather the effectiveness with which he handles these tasks (Steven, 1985). The definition of effectiveness as it relates to a principal’s performance is a researched and documented set of criteria supported by those in the field.

As a result of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 (NCLB), the pressures placed on the shoulders of educational leaders has become extremely heavy in terms of accountability (Steicher & Kirby as cited in Golding Hawthorne, 2009). School principals are now responsible for meeting many more expectations than their predecessors (Aldridge, 2003). Student performance on standardized tests has become the primary indicator by which schools are measured as adequate or in need of improvement. Title I schools considered in need of improvement for two or more years

2 face harsh consequences, which can result in their being closed and later re-opened as a privately run charter school after five years of being on the list (Luizzi as cited in Golding

Hawthorne, 2009). As challenges continue to mount within school districts, principals face the challenge of fewer resources, difficult teacher unions, and the task of serving numerous cultures of students who bring a multitude of various needs to schools.

Educational leaders in the 21st century must establish the development of strong academic programs of instruction, appropriate curriculum, and ongoing assessments that allow for both the formative and summative tracking of students’ academic achievement

(Association for Middle Level Education [AMLE], 2012). Educational leaders are also responsible for building high functioning teams (Bolman & Deal, 1997; Lencioni, 2002), healthy learning organizations (Yukl, 2002), and a positive school climate (Peterson &

Smith, 2000).

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is another area of accountability facing school leaders today. States are in charge of developing their own criteria for meeting AYP. All kindergarten through twelfth grade schools are required to demonstrate AYP in the areas of reading-language arts, mathematics, and either graduation rates, for high schools and districts, or attendance rates for elementary and middle schools. Under NCLB, the students in each state are expected to be “performing at or above proficient levels in reading and mathematics by the end of the 2013-2014 school year” (Education

Commission of the United States, 2002, p. 2). Title I schools are not removed from the list of those in need of improvement until the AYP goals are achieved for two

3 consecutive years. One solution for schools in the corrective or restructuring phase of

NCLB is the removal of the administrator and/or the faculty. The pressure felt by today’s leaders is inevitable and inescapable (Luizzi, 2007).

Positive school climate has been recognized as the foundation of successful schools and a strong predictor of the academic success of students (Van Horn, 2003).

Research has strongly supported the fact that the leadership of a school principal directly impacts the climate of the school and, in turn, the achievement of its students (Norton,

2002). School districts need leaders who can create a fundamental transformation in the learning cultures of schools and in the teaching profession itself. The role of the principal as instructional leader is too narrow a concept to carry the weight of the kinds of reforms that will create the schools we need for the future (Fullan, 1999). In spite of this available research, principals have largely overlooked the fact that a healthy school climate has a direct effect on student achievement (Bulach & Malone, 1994). In considering how a leader creates and maintains a healthy school climate, one might consider the concept of cultural intelligence. When measuring the capacity for each to learn and succeed, studies have proven intelligence is a complex, interdependent system whereby people make meaning through experiencing life, understanding knowledge, solving problems and making decisions, and creating and shaping environments that sustain and renew our growth and well-being (McCarthy, 2000). A school principal must be successful in all the above areas to influence the cultural and motivational factors of the school and its students.

4

The notion of the importance of cultural intelligence in improving the leadership potential of school administrators continues to gain acceptance. As a construct, it is new to academia. It is already well established in the private sector. Particularly in business, more and more, people ask for the tools and information that help carry them through intercultural and cross-cultural interactions. There are a multitude of tools and methods that are useful for managing and leading on a global level. The cultural intelligence framework is one of them (Mova, 2010). It is argued that an ability to change, empathize with others, and handle adversity are among the traits that could redefine the essence of intellect. When defining and structuring the culture of a school, change, empathy, and handling adversity are among the greatest challenges of a principal’s career. In the wake of NCLB and the growing emphasis on high-stakes state tests and administrator accountability combined with the growing population of culturally diverse students, it is necessary to ensure that those leading the schools are culturally intelligent leaders.

There is evidence of the importance of the interrelationships between the principal’s behavior, school climate, and school effectiveness (Salisbury & McGregor,

2005). While there is extensive evidence a positive school climate promotes student achievement, specific strategies and practices to improve school climate and, thus improve the cognitive climate and culture, are lacking in research literature. In the public arena, there is no area with more exposure than that of education where evidence shows the need for culturally intelligent leaders. As the growing population of culturally

5 diverse students continues to impact public schools, culturally intelligent leaders must be present. The culturally intelligent leader will have a direct impact on the culture and climate of the school.

Due to the growing concerns with accountability and the lack of faith in the public school system as perceived by the public, the climate of the elementary school has been dramatically altered over the past decade. The high-stakes standards and shrinking resources available to school districts have dramatically added to this change of climate.

The higher academic standards are for all students and highly impact the children of all major and marginalized subgroups. The factors greatly influence teacher job satisfaction, which in turn influences student achievement and overall school climate. Principals are essential for ongoing teacher satisfaction and retention within the school (Varner, 2007).

The most important reason for cultivating a positive school climate is to create an effective school. Effective schools result in advanced school improvement, enhanced student learning, and teacher satisfaction. To achieve these goals, it is necessary for the principal to possess an understanding of both the culture and climate of the school, to be a visionary leader, and to demonstrate spiritual, moral, and ethical qualities in their daily responsibilities (Prince, 2006).

Statement of the Problem

Substantial numbers of schools are operating ineffectively and failing to meet the academic standards set forth in this unprecedented age of accountability (Prince, 2006).

6

Numerous leadership models have existed by which educational leaders can pattern their duties and responsibilities (Hallinger & Heck, 1999; Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach,

2000; Sergiovanni, 2000; Yukl, 2006). Recent research indicates that current leadership models utilized alone fall short for preparing today’s leaders to successfully function in our 21st-century schools (Bolman & Deal, 2002; Day, 2005). It is important there be a focus on the effective leadership behaviors and practices vital to 21st-century elementary school principals to aide in their success as leaders. With the rise in globalization and the increased emphasis on global competition in the workforce, student success is of paramount concern. While the behaviors and practices of secondary principals are much the same and certainly the need for student success is equally of concern, this research focuses specifically on elementary school principals.

Being able to interact with groups and being culturally aware is critically important and a key factor to the success of 21st-century leaders. There is a question as to whether those in education are putting culturally intelligent leaders in place. If students are not prepared to compete in the global world, the United States as a whole stands to decline in economic growth and leadership capacity. Having the ability to interact with groups and prepare students to be globally competitive and being culturally aware of how to reach numerous diverse groups is critically important and a key factor to the success of leaders in schools.

The problem facing public education is the disconnect occurring between those principals who are successful in establishing a positive, inviting, and inclusive climate

7 serving all students equally and those who are unsuccessful as school leaders in attaining this goal. If districts use the proven characteristics established by current literature in the field such as those suggested by Elaine McEwan in Ten Traits of Highly Effective

Principals and hire those individuals who possess strong cultural intelligence, there is a better chance those principal leaders can guide schools to overall success. In determining the successful principal leader, districts must be more aware of the aforementioned traits along with indicators of cultural intelligence.

Nature and Purpose of the Study

The study of cultural intelligence and how it applies to successful educators in public school settings needs further research. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a positive correlation between the measured levels of cultural intelligence and principals who were considered highly effective in the position as leader. The study was designed to answer the following question: How do highly effective elementary school principals, based on the 10 characteristics of highly effective principals, demonstrate high levels of cultural intelligence? A survey and interview protocol were used to collect data both measurable and observable.

The individuals selected for the case study were elementary school principals in a northern California school district. Initially, all 39 of the elementary principals in the selected district were invited to participate in a Cultural Intelligence Inventory (CQS).

Following the inventory, the Associate Superintendent selected 12 principals considered

8 highly effective in their role as leader of the school. Individuals were selected by the

Associate Superintendent of the district based on the distributed criteria of current literature defining a highly effective principal. Five principals were randomly selected from the 12 identified as effective principals. The school criteria had to meet a 60:40 demographic distribution with no single ethnic population exceeding 60% of the total school population. With this criteria in place, the ethnicities of students and community would give the principal multiple opportunities to demonstrate cultural intelligence. Each of the five principals who participated took part in a 20-question cultural intelligence inventory, a one-on-one interview, and an ethnographic field study consisting of an observation during an average school day in which the principal was conducting leadership around campus.

Research Questions

1. How do highly effective principals demonstrate high levels of cultural

intelligence?

2. How do highly effective principals recognize their own cultural intelligence

and consciously use this to improve their interactions?

3. How do highly effective principals exhibit observable behaviors in their

interactions with parents, students, and teachers, demonstrating high levels of

cultural intelligence?

9

Conceptual Framework and Theories

Cognitive psychology and intelligence theory development have been studied at length. The research and studies performed build on one another and create a solid academic foundation for understanding intelligence. Numerous theorists have contributed to the field of cognitive intelligence. Robert Sternberg is one of the most influential modern theorists associated with the field of cognitive intellectual development. In addition to his theory of the triarchic model of intelligence, he is one of the foremost experts on the development of cognitive psychology. Cianciolo and

Sternberg (2004) found,

The tri-archic model of successful intelligence has three sub theories which characterize, (1) the mental mechanism that underlies successful intelligence. (2) the way in which people use these mechanisms t attain intelligent fit to the Environment and (3) the role of experience in mobilizing cognitive mechanisms to meet environmental demands. (p. 27)

Sternberg’s (2000) theories also address the importance of culture in relation to intelligence: “People in different cultures may develop somewhat different intellectual abilities depending on the kind of intellectual competencies that are valued by their particular culture” (p. 22). Sternberg’s theories and studies on both intellectual development and the importance of culture on developing intelligence are extremely important to the developing concept and understanding of cultural intelligence as a whole. Additionally, Sternberg (2004) suggested several core mental processes that transcend environmental context:

(1) recognizing the existence of a problem,

10

(2) defining the nature of the problem,

(3) constructing a strategy to solve the problem,

(4) mentally representing information about the problem,

(5) allocating mental resources to solve the problem,

(6) monitoring one’s solution to the problem, and

(7) evaluating one’s solution to the problem.

Another equally important theorist in the field of intellectual development is

Howard Gardner. Gardner (1983) contributed to the field with his theories of Multiple

Intelligences (MI). Gardner’s theories add to the understanding of both intellectual development and the importance the impact of culture has on the development of intelligence theory. Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligence proposes that intelligent behavior does not emerge from a single unitary quality of the mind as the general intelligence based theories profiled; rather, different kinds of intelligences are generated from specific pools of mental energy. Gardner proposed seven intelligences: linguistic, logical mathematical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, and intrapersonal

(Indiana University, 2007b). Gardner (1983) stated,

I argue that there is a persuasive evidence for the existence of several relatively autonomous human intellectual competencies, abbreviated hereafter as human intelligences. These are frames of the mind. There exists at least some intelligences, that are relatively independent of one another and that they can be fashioned and combined in a multiplicity of adaptive ways by individuals and cultures seems to be increasingly difficult to deny. (p. 9)

In addition, Gardner had goals he wished to accomplish with his work on multiple intelligences. He tried to expand the scope of cognitive and developmental psychology

11 by studying the biological roots as well as the cultural variations in the cognitive competencies. Gardner then examined the implications of multiple intelligence theory.

He felt the intellectual profile could be identified at a young age. Lastly, Gardner hoped that with the assistance of anthropologists, a model of how intellectual competencies could be fostered through various cultural settings would be established within his work.

Raymond Terrell (Terrell & Lindsey, 2009) plays an important role in the discussion of and needs of culturally diverse communities. He believed the goal is to see cultural proficiency as a way to understand, embrace, and talk about differences that recognize and respect individuals and their cultures. While the accountability movement is an unprecedented challenge to school leaders, it does offer opportunities for school and community members to challenge prevailing notions of equity and diversity by linking them to access and inclusion in ways that have never been considered before. Through the continued building of Cultural Intelligence among principals, these opportunities for students and community members can become more available.

Finally, Daniel Goleman (1995) made a contribution to the field of cognitive intelligence by presenting his theory of emotional intelligences. Goleman believes non- cognitive skills matter just as much as, if not more than, the cognitive measures of IQ.

He believes emotional intelligence to be important in any job with regard to who will exceed expectations.

Studies have been conducted to determine the characteristics of highly successful principals. Throughout the literature, 10 specific characteristics of highly effective

12 principals emerged. Various studies stated that all successful leaders must possess all 10 characteristics. According to Elaine K. McEwan (2003), highly effective principals are good communicators, highly educated, maintain a vision, can facilitate, are masters of change, have the ability to build cultures, can put things into action and motion, can produce results, build character, and contribute to the overall success of mankind. A review of the literature to support this definition is presented in Chapter 2. No studies have been done to measure cultural intelligence as it relates to highly effective principals in a singular district. While numerous articles and studies on cultural intelligence exist, there is nothing as it relates to the success of principals and leading schools in a diverse school district. One study measured Cultural Intelligence as it relates to principals serving a larger population. While the one study designed and conducted by Whitney

Naughten (2010) covered a larger demographic area, no studies have been done to measure Cultural Intelligence as it relates to effective principal leadership in a single district serving a highly diverse population. While there are numerous articles and studies on Cultural Intelligence, there is nothing as it relates to the success of principals and leading schools.

P. Christopher Earley, Joo-Seng Tan, and Soon Ang are the current experts in the field of cultural intelligence theory. They stated, “Cultural Intelligence theory was developed to answer the question why some people function more successfully in culturally diverse situations than others?” (Earley, Ang, & Tan, 2006, p. 3). Cognitive cultural intelligence “reflects knowledge of norms, practices, and conventions in different

13 cultures that has been acquired from educational and personal experiences” (p. 5).

Motivational cultural intelligence “reflects the capability to direct attention and energy toward learning about and functioning in situations characterized by cultural differences”

(p. 5). Finally, the authors theorized that behavioral cultural intelligence “reflects the ability to exhibit appropriate verbal and non verbal actions when interacting with people from different cultures. Behavioral Cultural Intelligence refers to the extent in which individuals act appropriately both verbally and nonverbally in cross-cultural situations”

(Earley et al., 2006, p. 6).

A 20-item cultural intelligence test was developed by Ang and Earley (Ang &

Van Dyne, 2008). In the Earley and Ang (2003) study, they used 20 items from four subcategories, meta-cognitive CQ, cognitive CQ, motivational CQ, and behavioral CQ.

The test provides a cross validation and strong empirical support for the reliability, stability, and validity of the Cultural Intelligence Survey. It demonstrates that specific dimensions of Cultural Intelligence have differential relationships with behavioral effectiveness outcomes of intercultural communication. The result of the Cultural

Intelligence Survey has important implications for practice especially in selecting, training, and developing culturally intelligent leaders in public schools.

14

Operational Definitions

The following terms are operationally defined for the purpose of this study.

Accountability

Accountability is multi-faceted: it involves responsibility, authority, evaluation

and control. So how might “accountability” in education be defined? Explicit

definitions of accountability in the literature were infrequent. The following

“working” definition of accountability is proposed (Heim, 1995).

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

The NCLB Act mandates “all schools, districts, and states show that students are

making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in English Language Arts and

Mathematics. NCLB requires states to establish annual performance targets that

would result in all students scoring at the proficient level on their state’s

assessment by the 2013-2014 school year (California Department of Education

Website).

Cognition

The act or process of knowing; perception. The product of such a process;

something thus known, perceived, etc. Knowledge.

Cognitive psychology

The branch of psychology studying the mental processes involved in perception,

learning, memory, and reasoning.

15

Cultural intelligence

Cultural intelligence, cultural quotient or CQ, is a theory within management and

organizational psychology, posing that understanding the impact of an

individual’s cultural background on his or her behavior is essential for effective

business, measuring an individual’s ability to engage successfully in any

environment or social setting. CQ is measured on a scale, similar to that used to

measure an individual’s intelligence quotient. People with higher CQs are

regarded as better able to successfully blend in to any environment, using more

effective business practices than those with a lower CQ (Earley et al., 2006).

Culture

The sum total ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted

from one generation to another; the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a

particular social, ethnic, or age group: for example “the youth culture,” the “drug

culture,” etc.

Elementary school principals

Individuals employed full-time as elementary school principals (serving any

combination of grades Pre-K through 6) in a Northern California School District.

Elementary school teachers

Individuals employed full-time as elementary school teachers (serving any

combination of grades Pre-K through Grade 6) in a Northern California School

District.

16

Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Often measured as an emotional intelligence quotient (EQ), describes a concept

that involves the ability, capacity, skill, or a self-perceived ability to identify,

assess, and manage the emotions of one’s self, of others, and of groups.

Highly effective leader

A leader who demonstrates 10 very specific job-related skills, including being an

educator, a facilitator, a producer, a visionary, a change agent, a character builder,

a builder of culture, a communicator, an activator and one who contributes to

society (McEwan, 2003).

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)

NCLB (2002) is the latest federal legislation enacting the theories of standards-

based reform, based on the belief that setting high standards and establishing

measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. The act requires

states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in grades 2-

12, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools. The act does not

assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state.

Assumptions, Limitations, Scope and Delimitations

The following assumptions were made:

1. Participants will accurately report their perceptions of principal practices and

effectiveness and their own level of job satisfaction.

17

2. The Cultural Intelligence Inventory (CQS) will accurately measure cultural

intelligence of principals who depict practices and effectiveness in their

position as leaders.

3. Participants will be open and honest in their responses and will interpret the

survey instruments in the way in which they were intended.

4. Participants will respond to the surveys based on personal actions and

awareness.

The following delimitations must be considered when drawing conclusions from this research:

1. The study was delimited by geographic parameters utilized in one Northern

California school district.

2. The study was delimited to one academic school year from which results were

obtained.

3. The study was delimited to a specific sample population deemed highly

effective and chosen based on the common accepted definition of highly

effective characteristics.

4. The study was delimited to the degree of validity and reliability of the survey

instrument utilized by the researcher.

5. The study was delimited by the experience of the researcher.

6. The study was delimited to elementary school principals.

18

The Significance of the Study

With the continuous change in demands of the Elementary school principal and the changes in demographics within California schools, there is an ongoing need for continuous study of principal practices that lead to school improvement. Currently,

California schools are making little to no growth in the area of closing the achievement gap for children who are minorities, second language learners, and of lower socio economic status. The value of principals’ personally and professionally engaging in practices that employ new applications is critical to helping schools systematically improve student outcomes. This study of the behavior practices of effective elementary school principals will help provide data to show a correlation between inviting principal actions, interactions, and school transformation. Transformational leaders display emotional intelligence, directly tied to developing relationships. This type of leader is proficient at building and managing relationships, as well as establishing common ground. They are able to influence others, lead through change, and build strong teams.

These relationships result in a devotion of personal attention to staff, students, and parent stakeholders. Additionally, these relationships, built with Cultural Intelligence in mind, help bridge the acceptance and adaptability of students and families and over time help establish trust and improved academic outcomes.

19

Conclusion

Chapter1 presented a statement of the problem as well as a detailed justification for the study. Current accepted knowledge and theories in the fields of cognitive intelligence, cultural intelligence theory, and the characteristics highly effective principals possess were also presented. The need for research to be completed to add to the knowledge in the field of cultural intelligence is evident. Application of the results of the study will add to existing knowledge in identifying and hiring highly effective principals. This body of knowledge will add to the element as it relates to cultural intelligence and its use in public schools. Chapter 1 also included the purpose statement, the research questions, and the significance of the study on highly effective principals and the presence of cultural intelligence.

Chapter 2 contains a review of the literature supporting the research questions and offering a foundational background of each area and school related to the study. Included is information on the cognitive psychology and anthropology as well as a detailed review of intelligence testing. In addition, current theory related to highly effective principals and cultural intelligence is presented.

Chapter 3 presents the research methodology used in the study. It includes the statement of the purpose of the study and the research questions. Additionally, the research design, population sample used, instruments, and data collection procedures are outlined. A list of the limitations of the study is included as well as a summary of the chapter.

20

Chapter 4 presents an analysis of the data for both the quantitative and qualitative areas of the study. Also included is the analysis of the research questions. The population and sample development as well as the instrumentation are included. The chapter concludes with an analysis of the procedures and summation of the findings.

Chapter 5 includes an overall study analysis, interpretations of the findings, and further recommendations.

21

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

Recent years have seen an increased interest in the study of effective leadership and organizational management in public education. This is due in part to the realization of success (or lack thereof) of American public education in relation to other industrialized nations, and to increased spending on initiatives to increase the success of public education in the United States (Kim, 2002). The rapidly changing world has put the United States in a position to no longer be on the cutting edge of technology and business. The suggestion that the United States, as a successful, strong nation, is slipping into mediocrity is ever present in the minds of its citizens. On a daily basis, news reports indicate the nation’s youth are not being educated to the degree of competing national norms. The threat to the nation’s foundation has been seen in the credit crisis, mortgage meltdown, the dissolving job market, and the demise of success in public education. To take back a place in the world, the nation must stop the downward spiral and become competitive with the global world. It is imperative the United States be a global economy, a global market, and a global intelligence when it comes to business, economics, interactions, and relations with other nations. The educational arena is one place where global intelligence can be cultivated. If done successfully, there could

22 potentially be an impact on the future of students and, ultimately, on the workforce of our country.

In the United States, public schools have a growing culturally diverse population.

Principals face the challenge of the No Child Left Behind Act and the importance of high stakes testing and accountability. As an effective public school leader, one must be able to interact and communicate effectively with many different cultures at one time. In the business world, those with a higher level of cultural intelligence are seen as more successful than those who do have strength in that trait. The researcher believes the same may hold true for effective public education leaders. How do those principals who are highly effective also demonstrate higher levels of cultural intelligence? Are those principals who possess high levels of cultural intelligence more successful than those who do not? Do highly effective principals recognize their personal cultural intelligence and consciously use this knowledge to improve their relationship with others? These questions are the foundation of this study. Should it be determined that highly effective principals also have high levels of cultural intelligence, then the selection, training, and development of educational leaders will thus need to increase attention to this added strength as a possible criteria and area for professional development.

To understand the significance of the study, the foundation and background of the related fields must be investigated. Cultural intelligence came into existence through the study of cognitive psychology, intelligence testing, and cultural anthropology. This study additionally includes an exploration of the characteristics that quantify an effective

23 school leader. With the impact of multiple cultures in the public school system in

California and across the nation, culturally sensitive and culturally intelligent leaders are an obligation.

Theoretical Research and Literature

The theory of intelligence has been an area cognitive psychologists have tried to define and quantify for the last 100 years. Psychology has two specific schools of thought: one is related to how knowledge is acquired and one is related to intelligence theory. One is how people think while the other relates to cognitive strength.

Intelligence testing is another area related to cultural intelligence. Again, there are differing ideas as there is a progressive development of techniques by which a person’s intelligence is measured, known as the IQ, or there are several ranges of multiple or emotional intelligences. In the area of anthropology, for over the past 100 years scientists have tried to define and quantify the concept of culture. All three of the historical background concepts relate directly to the development and understanding of the theory of cultural intelligence and the measurement and possible applications for significance, implication, and study. The three areas discussed, intelligence theory, understanding the concept of culture, and the measurement and analysis of intelligence testing combined with the identification of effective school leaders are the foundation for understanding whether highly effective elementary school principals also possess high levels of cultural intelligence.

24

The researcher reviewed the related material in the following manner. Initially, a discussion of the theories and development of intelligence theory is presented. Following is a discussion showing the definitions and understanding of the concept of culture.

Intelligence testing theory is briefly presented as well as how it relates to the study.

These three areas of research provide a foundation for understanding cultural intelligence as a construct. Wrapping up the review is an exploration of current trends and philosophies related to defining characteristics of a highly effective principal.

Background Contributions from Cognitive Psychology

One of the first theorists to contribute to the field of cognitive psychology was

Edward Thorndike. Thorndike (1920) stated, “social intelligence is based on the division of intelligence into three facets, abstract intelligence, mechanical intelligence and social intelligence” (p. 359). Thorndike’s understanding and conception of social intelligence relates directly to supporting the current definitions and concepts of cultural intelligences.

In his definition, Thorndike believed social intelligence was the ability to understand men and women, boys and girls and how they act in human relations. He was an American pioneer in application of his theories of learning, particularly the theory of active learning. He believed learning is incremental, and it will take place naturally through association with other things and people. This theory is one of the applied theories within the study of effective principals and their cultural intelligences.

25

The next significant contributor to the understanding of intelligence is Charles

Spearman. Charles Spearman (1904) was the first to clinically define intelligence.

Spearman concluded intelligence could be understood in terms of both a single general factor pervading performance on all tests of mental ability and a set of specific factors each of which is involved in performance on a single type of mental ability test.

Spearman was also responsible for coining the initial “g” as intelligence in relation to his general factor theory of intelligence. “G” provides the key to understanding intelligence.

Spearman believed “g” to be representative of mental energy” (Sternberg, 1996). He believed all beings had a “g” factor representing a measure of intelligence. While he was adamant about his theory, he additionally stated it had no place in education as teachers were to draw out from students the intelligence they brought to the classroom.

Another contributor to the field is Louis Leon Thurstone. He argued that

Spearman’s concept of “g” was not sufficient (Indiana University, 2007c). He countered there are seven independent factors called primary abilities making up the intelligence of human beings. Included in these are abilities such as word fluency, verbal comprehension, spatial visualization, number facility, associative memory, reasoning, and perceptual speed. Thurstone found that when he tested people with similar IQs, they had varying levels of primary abilities: visualization, number facility, associative memory, reasoning, and perceptual speed (Indiana University, 2007c). Thurstone’s theory relates directly to Gardner’s multiple intelligences and the theory of cultural intelligence as a separate intelligence worthy of study. With Thurstone’s theory in mind,

26 one can see the relationship of multiple intelligences to the various observable abilities when principals interact with those of other cultures.

Lev Vygotsky was an important contributor to the field of cognitive psychology.

More importantly, he has contributed important information in the area of cultural intelligence. Vygotsky (1978) was the first to explore the role of culture in child development and how this role impacted interpersonal communication and development.

Vygotsky’s theory is referred to as cultural mediation. He determined a child’s intelligence is formed by the interactions and shared knowledge of his culture (Vygotsky,

1978). Additionally, Vygotsky believed individuals used psychological tools to develop a more in-depth understanding of other people. The psychological tools are the language, imagery, thinking styles, and other artifacts in a particular culture used to enhance human mental capability” (p. 19).

An in-depth study on the development of cognitive intelligence would not be complete without a discussion of Jean Piaget and his contributions to the field of intelligence. Primarily, he contributed significantly in the development of intelligence in children. Piaget determined the existence of four areas or stages in the cognitive development of children including the sensor motor stage (birth to age 2), preoperational stage (age 2-7), concrete operational stage (age 7-11), and the formal operational stage

(after age 11) (Learning and Teaching, 2011). He additionally explained that mental development and learning are influenced by cultural effects on cognitive functioning. It

27 is Piaget’s theories that link the importance of cultural intelligence theory and the development of cultural intelligence over time (Berger, 2004).

Robert Sternberg, a theorist in the area of cognitive intellectual development, added his theory of the triarchic model to the field of study. Additionally, he is an expert in the area of cognitive psychology. His understanding of intelligence mentions three sub theories characterizing the intellectual development of an individual: (1) the mental mechanism used for knowledge acquisition, (2) the way people use their intelligence to adapt to an environment, and (3) the role of drawing on past experiences for their environment such as problem solving. In addition, Sternberg addressed the importance of culture as it relates to intelligence. “People in different cultures may develop somewhat different intellectual abilities depending on the kind of intellectual competencies that are valued by their particular culture” (Sternberg, 2004, p. 22).

Sternberg’s theories and studies on both intellectual development and the importance of culture on developing intelligence are extremely important to the developing concept and understanding of cultural intelligence. Sternberg suggested several core mental processes that transcend environmental context:

(1) recognizing the existence of a problem,

(2) defining the nature of the problem,

(3) constructing a strategy to solve the problem,

(4) mentally representing information about the problem,

(5) allocating mental resources to solve the problem,

28

(6) monitoring one’s solution to the problem, and

(7) evaluating one’s solution to the problem. (p. 131)

The mental processes described were further developed and relate directly to the Earley and Ang model of cultural intelligences and the extensive studies done by these researchers (Ang et al., 2007).

Howard Gardner (1983) contributed to the field of intelligence with his theories of multiple intelligences (MI). His contribution to the field is important as it adds to the impact of culture on intelligence. He viewed intelligence as “the capacity to solve problems or to fashion products that are valued in one or more cultural settings” (Gardner

& Hatch, 1989, p. 62). Howard Gardner initially formulated a list of seven intelligences.

The first two have been typically valued in schools; the next three are usually associated with the arts; and the final two are what Howard Gardner called “personal intelligences”

(Gardner, 1999).

Linguistic intelligence involves sensitivity to spoken and written language, the ability to learn languages, and the capacity to use language to accomplish certain goals.

Logical-mathematical intelligence consists of the capacity to analyze problems logically, such as mathematical operations or investigating issues scientifically. Musical intelligence involves skill and the performance, composition, and appreciation of musical patterns. Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence entails the potential of using one’s whole body or parts of the body to solve problems. Spatial intelligence involves the potential to recognize and use the patterns of wide space and more confined areas. Interpersonal

29 intelligence is concerned with the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations, and desires of other people. Finally, intrapersonal intelligence entails the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one’s feelings, fears, and motivations. In In Frames of

Mind, Gardner (1983) claimed that the seven intelligences rarely operate independently.

They are used at the same time and tend to complement each other as people develop skills or solve problems. As cultural intelligence is acquired and used by individuals, many if not all the seven intelligences introduced by Gardner can be identified.

Daniel Goleman developed the theory of emotional intelligence. Goleman believed non-cognitive skills matter just as much as, if not more than, the cognitive measures of IQ and “g.” Goleman (1995) stated emotional intelligence involves managing our social signals, those we use with the people with whom we interact. If we can control them, our social outcomes improve. Hence, enhancing emotional intelligence becomes a necessary goal. Goleman (1998) also stated the following:

Our emotional intelligence determines our potential for learning the practical skills that are based on its five elements: self awareness, motivation, self regulation, empathy, and adeptness in relationships. Our emotional competence shows how much of that potential we have translated into on-the-job capabilities. (pp. 24-25)

In addition, Goleman noted people entering certain lines of work have similar IQs.

However, emotional IQ is another matter. The discrepancy between emotional IQs of two people can be huge; thus, heightened emotional IQ levels can offer a serious advantage.

30

Culture and intelligence are linked according to Jerome Bruner, a theorist on intelligence. Bruner (2008) indicated the search for meaning and the culture of the individual are the causes for a person’s human actions. Bruner is a key person in linking the understanding of culture and the understanding of intelligence acquisition together.

Bruner is known for his focus on the impact of culture on nurturing and shaping growth of an individual. Jerome Bruner in The Culture of Education (1996) shared that culture is what shapes the mind. He believes human beings prepare for the world in the same way they were shaped and nurtured by their culture.

Bruner (1996) wrote that culture provides us with the tool kit with which we construct not only our worlds but our very conception of ourselves and our powers.

Bruner had a great appreciation of analysis of problems and believed any child at any age could be taught a concept at some level of importance. In his studies, he discussed how, out of their encounters with the world, human beings created an interpretive discipline in how to deal with the meaning of individual encounters.

Finally, Michael Cole (1981) is a cognitive psychologist whose work is focused on how people think. He specifically studies how intelligence tests have incorrectly led to the improper labeling of groups or people. Additionally, he has focused on the identification of perceived deficits based on differences between cultural groups. Due to the variables in question writing, methodology, and survey interpretation, differences in intelligence labeling may occur between cultural groups. The implication is that often these differences are to the negative influence of various cultural groups. Michael Cole

31 and Barbara Means (1981), in their book Comparative Studies of How People Think; An

Introduction, described the problems involved in comparing how people think. They showed how variables within two groups can lead to wrong interpretations of differences in how people from various cultures think. They cited question writing, methodology, and survey interpretation as reasons why differences may occur. They argued the differences may not be actual differences between groups, but rather problems with the test questions and different interpretations of those questions; “for every area of comparative research, there are specific methodological problems. Comparisons across cultural groups for example, raise concerns about whether the experimenter’s questions, formulated in one language, conveyed the same meaning to members of other language groups” (p. 2). In their book A Cultural Context of Learning and Thinking, Michael

Cole, John Gay, Joseph Glick, and Donald Sharp (1971) focused on how the culture of a person, as he/she grows up, affects the way he/she thinks. In the study, they focused on determining if the thinking and learning abilities were different from one culture to the other. In their work, they questioned whether the Anglo American ways of educating are ineffective for diverse students from various cultures. They pointed out a distinct link between culture and the cognitive psychology of the learner.

Cultural Contributions of Anthropology

The study of cultural anthropology has been developed with an approach from assorted and various theories. While cognitive theorists built their theories on past studies, cultural theory has been built on a number of independent ideas and observations

32 of anthropologists from various indigenous cultures. The actual experiences of these theorists and their in-the-field observations have built the concept of Cultural

Anthropology.

The founding father of modern social anthropology is Sir Edward Burnett Tylor.

He focused on the cultural evolutionism and built his theory on previous research done by

Charles Darwin. He defined culture as “a complex whole including knowledge, belief, art, morals, laws, customs, and any other capability or habit acquired by human beings as a member of society” (Danesi & Perron, 1999, p. 47). In his definition, Tylor went further to differentiate between culture and society as they relate to anthropology.

Another contributor to anthropology was a German American, Frank Boas. He contributed the understanding of culture being the first to challenge museums in their display of historical objects insisting they be displayed in a cultural context rather than that of technological development. According to Franz Boas (1962), the group, not the individual, is the primary concern of the anthropologist. In his study of anthropology,

Frank Boas delineated the field of anthropology into four specific schools, linguistic anthropology, physical anthropology, cultural anthropology, and archaeology. His views of anthropology came to be known as cultural relativism. While evolutionists saw humans as adaptations to the forces of nature, Boas saw them as makers of their own worlds and themselves (Danesi & Perron, 1999).

A student of Boas, Ruth Benedict was the first female contributor to the field of anthropological theory. She was fascinated by the fact that cultures developed their own

33 morality and lifestyle largely determining the choices individuals make throughout their life cycles. Ruth Benedict in Patterns of Culture (1959) stated, “we must accept all the implications of our human inheritance, one of the most of which is the small scope of biologically transmitted behavior, and the enormous role of the cultural process of the transmission of traditions” (p. 103). She was one to embrace our human inheritance and the most important of our transmitted behaviors. Furthermore, Ruth Benedict (1959) stated:

The life history of the individual is first and foremost an accommodation to the patterns and standards traditionally handed down in his community. From the moment of his birth, the customs into which he is born shape his experience and behavior. (p. 56)

While there are several distinct definitions of the term culture, Clyde Kluckhohn and Alfred Kroeber found a consensus in two areas: (1) that culture is a way of life based on some systems of shared belief and (2) it is passed on from generation to generation through this very system (Kluckhohn & Kroeber, 1999). Additionally, they determined culture to be a total way of life of a people, thus individuals acquire their societal legacy from their group. Furthermore, an individual’s culture is a set of standardized orientations to recurrent problems and a learned set of behaviors handed down through generations. Anthropologist Clifford Geertz believed that without culture, human beings would have few instincts, few sentiments, and no intellect (Geertz, 1973). When individuals say they do not understand the actions of people from cultures other than their own, they are acknowledging their lack of familiarity with the universe.

34

The Background of Intelligence Testing

Francis Galton (Indiana University, 2007a), known as the father of mental testing, has contributed tremendously to the field of psychology and statistics. He formulated the statistical notion of correlation. This quantifiable theory has led to the understanding of how individuals can pass down characteristics, qualities, traits, and abilities from generation to generation. Further, Galton believed the foundation of intelligence rested on one’s capacity to exert effort and one’s sensitivity to the surrounding environment.

He believed smarter people have more acute senses, notice things more, and have more information available to them, thus making them better able to compete and succeed

(Galton, 2007).

The concept of intelligence testing came from a well known researcher David

Wechsler. In 1939 he developed an assessment known as the Wechsler Adult

Intelligence Scale (WAIS). Originally, the test was created to research more about his patients at Bellevue (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 2008). “The individually scaled test features both verbal and non verbal performance tests reflecting Wechsler’s belief that intelligence is expressed in both ways” (Cianciolo & Sternbert, 2004, p. 36).

Current Studies of Cultural Intelligence

Understanding Cultural Intelligence must be done through the three areas of study presented in the literature. The contributions from cognitive psychology, cultural anthropology, and intelligence testing are all equally important in the understanding of

35 cultural intelligence. Understanding the meaning of intelligence and its genesis, as well as understanding the meaning of culture and its genesis, combined with the development of intelligence testing, lays the foundational groundwork for understanding the concepts, implications, and significance of cultural intelligence and the importance of an instrument to measure an individual’s cultural intelligence (Earley et al., 2006).

Christopher Earley and Soon Ang are noted as the current experts in the field of cultural intelligence theory. They stated, “Cultural Intelligence theory was developed to answer the question why some people function more successfully in culturally diverse situations than others” (Earley et al., 2006, p. 3). According to Ang, Van Dyne, and Koh

(2006), the growing interest in “real world” intelligence has identified new types of intelligence focusing on specific content domains such as social intelligence, emotional intelligence, and practical intelligence. Cultural Intelligence similarly focuses on a specific domain, intercultural setting and is motivated by practical reality of globalization in the workplace.

Ang et al. (2006) went on to state, “CQ is another complimentary form of intelligence that can explain variability in coping and functioning in a cultural setting” (p.

4). Ang et al. further stated, “Cultural Intelligence is defined as the individual’s capability to function and manage effectively in a culturally diverse setting” (p. 3).

According to Schmidt and Hunter (as cited in Early et al., 2006), “Cultural Intelligence is the ability to grasp and reason correctly with abstractions and solve problems” (p. 3).

36

Cultural Intelligence Theory

As stated above, there is an abundance of research available in the areas of both culture and intelligence. There is not such a collection of resources available in the field of cultural intelligence as a combined term of usage. When the two terms are combined to define one concept, there is surprisingly little information (Ang et al., 2006). The theory of cultural intelligence is based on four domains of cultural intelligence as defined by Earley and Ang, the metacognitive domain, the cognitive domain, the motivational domain, and the behavioral domain. The “Big 5” personality traits are an adaptive mechanism humans use to cope with and meet the demands of a physical, social, and cultural environment. The concept of cultural intelligence is approached by investigating the implications of personality traits beyond the “Big 5” traits to cultural intelligence testing instead (Ang et al., 2006). There is a direct link between certain personality traits and a developed cultural intelligence (Ang et al., 2006).

Harry Triandis (2006), in his research on cultural intelligence, believes important attributes to cultural intelligence supersede each other. Triandis believes the ability to suspend judgment is by far the most important attribute. He stated, “Some attributes are especially important to achieve cultural intelligence. Perhaps the most important is the habit to suspend judgment, until enough information becomes available” (p. 20).

According to Triandis (2006), a culturally intelligent person suspends judgment, does not jump to conclusions, looks for current behavior in different situations, and has the ability to identify information relevant to making decisions. Triandis stated,

37

“Learning to put oneself in the shoes of other cultures can develop a healthy criticism of the norms of one’s own culture the way a so-called native sees it” (p. 22). A person wanting to increase his/her cultural intelligence must train him/herself by learning to integrate much more information and listen to many more cues than necessary when one is in one’s own culture. Also, suspension of judgment is critical for proper integration of new information. If these suspensions of judgment and views of other cultures are healthy for leaders of global organizations, it too would be helpful for educational leaders who serve multiple cultures of students and parents.

Thomas (2006) stated his belief that mindfulness is an essential characteristic involved in the successful development of cultural intelligence. He introduced mindfulness “as the key component that links knowledge with behavioral abilities” (p.

94). Thomas believes the development of CQ is presented as occurring through interactions of experiential learning.

Individuals can be thought of as progressing through stages of development beginning with mindlessly relating to external stimuli and culminating with the capability of understanding the nuances of intercultural interactions so as to intuitively know what behaviors are required and how to execute them effectively. (Thomas, 2006, p. 91)

Kerri Anne Crowne (2008) wrote that the importance of intercultural contact for the development of cultural intelligence is key to learning. The more contact and interaction an individual has with other cultures, the more culturally intelligent a person will become. In addition, she believes psychometric tests are not complete enough to show an individual’s full cultural intelligence potential. Instead, she argued for the

38 importance of interviews and experiential measures in cultural intelligence testing. She stated, “Developing an understanding of another culture is gained from experiences in that culture; this, it is thought, will eventually lead to a deeper understanding of a culture’s norms” (p. 15). Crowne further stated, “Exposure to various national cultures allows a person to become familiar with the products, norms, values and assumptions of that culture” (p. 13). In an article on the topic of cultural, emotional, and clinical intelligence, Shari Robertson (2007) stated, “interacting effectively with all persons in a sensitive and respectful manner, regardless of their backgrounds, requires a complex set of skills that, taken together has been described in the Harvard Business Review as cultural intelligence” (p. 14).

Thomas et al. (2008) stated, “Cultural intelligence has recently been introduced as a quantitative continuum of individual differences along which people are arrayed according to how much of this attribute they possess” (p. 124). The authors believe conventional methods of testing intelligence may be combined to get a better reading of an individual’s intelligences, but any alone are not enough to measure such a complex entity. Thomas et al. (2008) defined cultural intelligence as “a system of interacting abilities. In doing so, we build on the systems view of intelligence and provide a clear description of the interactive effect of cultural meta-cognition that allows for the emergence of cultural intelligence” (p. 138). Robert J. Sternberg and Elena Grigorenko

(2006) wrote:

What is considered intelligent differs from one place to the next. Often, researchers do their research as if culture does not matter. Often, research

39

continues to be done despite pervasive evidence that people in different cultures think and act differently. (p. 27)

The authors went on to mention the difference between successful and cultural intelligence. Successful intelligence refers to that within a culture, not across cultures like cultural intelligence. A person could be successfully intelligent without being culturally intelligent.

One of the most researched topics is that of cultural differences and acceptance of other people, harmony, and good relations. The knowledge and acceptance of cultural differences are not qualities limited to only a few people. People’s cultural intelligence can be increased with experience, practice, and positive attitude toward lifelong learning

(Brislin, Worthley, & MacNab, 2006). Maddy Janssens and Jeane M. Brett (2006) did worthy research on cultural intelligence and how it relates to global teams. As the world builds global teams to manage complex global markets and establish coordinators across global organizations, it is important there is an understanding of what the teamwork looks like in different cultures. There is substantial evidence that team members from different cultures have different perceptions of teamwork. Many cultures have hierarchical cultures where status holds a particular interpretation. Even the sharing of information or the suggestion of ideas is often seen differently from the perspective of other cultures.

Ilan Alon and James Higgins (2005) discussed in their work the importance of leaders being prepared for a global world experiences. They pointed out the fact that in the 21st century, no matter how small the organization, global participants will play a part, and the need for interaction will be evident. They stated, “It is evident that global

40 development should be a priority for companies (schools) that interact across cultures.

The interaction requires emotional and cultural intelligence” (p. 502).

Earley et al. (2006) wrote about the importance of not only knowing about and understanding what cultural intelligence is, but the importance of being aware of how to use it in measuring work-related situations. Earley et al. stated, “Cultural intelligence is becoming even more important as countries around the world undergo major demographic shifts in their workforce. Diversity is now accepted as part of the organizational landscape in many organizations” (p. 103). Earley et al. believe the more culturally intelligent the leader is, the more effective the relationships and interactions will be and, thus there will be overall success. The cultural leader never stops learning about other cultures and strategizes with other cultures in mind. The leader makes every effort to build bridges and an environment that fosters appropriate behavior and understandings.

The experts most noted for their contribution to cultural intelligence, Ang et al.

(2007), used their cultural intelligence survey (CQS) to measure the impact cultural intelligence had on cultural judgment, decision making, cultural adaption, and task performance. Two hypotheses were presented in the work: “Hypothesis 1: Meta- cognitive (CQ) and Cognitive (CQ) will relate positively to cultural judgment and decision making (CJDM) effectiveness. Hypothesis 2: Motivational (CQ) and Behavioral

(CQ) will relate positively to cultural adaptation”. In three substantial studies by Ang et al. (2007) using three cross validation samples, strong empirical support was found for

41 the reliability, stability, and validity of the CQS and demonstrated that different dimensions of CQ have differential relationships with cognitive, affective, and behavioral intercultural effectiveness outcomes.

Sternberg (1997) wrote that schools and organizations were really not different in need or performance. Both organizations and schools develop a culture within the organization that promotes and recognizes things in a certain way. Because there is typically competitive pressure in both organizations and schools, there is little time to continually change what the culture of the organization is doing. Thus, two different ideas are proposed by Sternberg: “1. Schools and other institutions from households to businesses to cultures value certain ways of doing things more than others, and 2. People whose ways of thinking do not match those valued by the institutions are usually penalized” (p. 8). This would indirectly explain why there is a focus on the importance of cultural intelligence in business and schools alike. Often in schools, it is those of the minority culture who are doing things differently and are penalized for the behavior.

Effective Leadership Practices of School Principals

Finally, to complete the research related to the importance of cultural intelligence and skills reflecting a highly effective principal leader, it must be noted that effective principal leaders can have a vision and a mission with the best of intentions for implementation, but be unable to execute. An abundance of research examines highly effective principals and what specific skills one would display. The research topic of

42 effective principals is saturated with the recurring specific themes and categories.

Sunderman, Orfield, and Kim (2006) stated, “There is an urgent need for strong, committed, long term leaders in schools that need improvement. These leaders must have vision and the ability to find and hold strong staff members” (p. 24). Rammer

(2007) further stated, “Effective principals need to have a sense of vision, resourcefulness, a process of school improvement, instructional support, and knowledge about student performance in math and composition” (p. 68). It is important to note that the majority of schools in need of improvement are those with the greatest cultural diversity, often the most languages represented, and typically the lowest socio- economically disadvantaged students. Over and over in the research discussing the achievement gap and how it relates to students of color, the need for principal leadership is evident at every school, particularly at those serving this population of students.

Throughout the mass of research, 10 specific themes continuously emerged as the most specific characteristics of highly effective principals. According to McEwan

(2003), highly effective principals are good communicators, highly educated, maintain a vision, facilitate with skill, and are masters of change, build cultures, put things into action and motion, produce, build character, and contribute. In her study, McEwan put together a 37-item trait list she sent to principals, superintendents, central office administrators, university professors, staff developers, teachers, parents, school board members, and educational activists around the country. From the list of 37, 10 traits repeatedly emerged as the top identifiers of a highly effective principal. In the research,

43

McEwan stated there was a definite synergistic relationship between some traits. As an example, effective principals cannot build culture unless they have the combination of three other traits, communicator, the envisioner, and the character builder. These three traits are the legs of culture building in the school. In the absence of one of them, the principal will not be able to build a positive and productive culture.

The first trait McEwan (2003) described in detail is that of envisioning: “You must have a vision. Without one you cannot become a highly effective principal” (p. 52).

McEwan believes when a principal has the trait of envisioning, she can picture the school being successful. The principal who can envision success of the school knows what is currently happening at the school and can imagine it changing and being successful.

Principals with a mission and vision create synergy and focus among staff and community. It is in this way they are able to make the vision in their mind come to fruition.

Another research study done by Schmieder and Cairns (1996) stated, “Effective leadership is a function of a leader’s style, personality, skill, and ability to articulate a vision acceptable to followers in a particular political situation” (p. 49). As researchers have mentioned, having a vision is vital to the success of a school. However, the most successful principals are not only able to establish the vision of the school but to articulate it as well. According to McEwan (2003), effective communication is another trait of highly effective principals: “Successful principals are communicating virtually

100% of the time when they are on the job – listening, speaking, writing, and reading.

44

Even when they don’t think they are communicating they are” (p. 2). Rammer (2007) stated, “The ability to communicate is an attribute that all successful principals must possess” (p. 69).

Too often, educators and educational policymakers experience a conversation gap when focusing on the achievement issues of students based on students’ cultural differences. The gap is many times unrecognized and unacknowledged during the conversation. Often, this is caused by the educator not having the perspective to see systemic roadblocks that have been, and are, impeding the academic success of socio- economic, racial, ethnic, gender, or language groups of our students. This selective invisibility can lead to a sense of privilege and entitlement for educators (Lindsey et al.,

2009). For those principals aware of cultural differences and who make a conscious effort to have communication open to the needs and differences of students, much greater progress can be made for all involved.

Lindsey et al. (2009) stated:

While systems of oppression impose barriers for members of cultural groups, concomitant systems of privilege and entitlement impose barriers for educators. The barriers erected by a sense of privilege and entitlement involve a skewed sense of reality that impedes one’s ability to pursue ethical and moral avenues in meeting the academic and social needs of cultural groups of students. (p. 8)

When educators feel a position of privilege, they often voice biased or ill-informed assumptions about parents from some cultural groups. It is these specific educators who need a different lens through which to better understand the obstacles their students face and their learning needs for success in school. A highly effective principal leader is

45 aware of these barriers and needs and uses the guiding principles, the continuum, and the essential elements to frame conversations with fellow educators about how parents and students who are culturally different from them behave and learn.

Cultural proficiency is an approach for surfacing educators’ assumptions ad values that undermine the success of some student groups, and a lens for examining how we include and honor the cultures and educational strengths and needs of all students in the educational proves. (Lindsey et al., 2009, p. 34)

As one of the top 10 traits of an effective principal, it is of utmost importance that principal leaders be aware of the need for culturally proficient school leaders and the impact of communicating that knowledge of sensitivity, understanding, and the act of embracing the differences by recognizing and respecting individuals and their cultures.

Summary

Within the research, there is a vast amount of material written in relation to cognitive psychology and to the theory of intelligence development. The studies performed create a solid foundation for the academic understanding of intelligence.

Among the various theories and research, common themes emerged relating definitions of intelligence and the study of multiple intelligences. Furthermore, another recurring theme is that of knowing more about one’s own intelligence and its strength.

Cultural anthropology is an in-depth area of study that relates to the themes found in intelligence and cognitive psychology. The topic of accepting various diverse peoples and determining a definitive definition of the term culture is written about extensively.

The research, unfortunately, comes to a short thread at this point. Putting the two terms

46 together so cultural intelligence is one definable term is when the research begins to decline. Within the area of academia, the term cultural intelligence has been studied in limited amounts. Generally, what studies do exist relate more to the government, business, medical, and military fields. There are numerous references to the importance of cultural intelligence as it relates to expatriates and global organizations. Today, there is limited research in the area of cultural intelligence and how it might relate to the success in an educational setting.

Many studies exist regarding the characteristics required to become effective principals and much literature to support those theories. However, studies relating to cultural intelligence and its impact on effective principals who are performing at levels of notice are needed. This study will help fill the gap, as it takes a known group of successful principals and measures the cultural intelligence to find how it is applied to the leaders’ successes. The information results of this study will help pave the future for exploration of further study in the field of cultural intelligence theory and application to education.

47

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

Schools are continually being challenged to achieve higher standards of academic excellence, and educational leaders are expected to be at the forefront of most school initiatives (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). Therefore, it is necessary to identify the significant leadership practices and characteristics principals display in school settings to focus on improving school conditions and increasing student achievement as ultimate goals. The problem facing education is the wide disconnection between those who are successful in the position of educational leadership and those who are not. If a school district can identify the characteristics possessed by those individuals proven to be successful, it could then change hiring practices so as to employ those who have the capability to lead a school to overall success. School districts, state officials, teachers, parents, and the general United States community are all concerned with the success of individual students in public education.

Student success is of paramount concern due to the emphasis on global competition in the workforce and the fact that the United States tends to lag far behind other countries in student achievement. Arne Duncan (2009) stated that, “American children are not getting smarter and they may not be good enough to compete globally.

The United States’ students placed below average in math and science trailing other

48 countries including Finland, China and Estonia.” If the students of the United States are not prepared to compete in a global world, this nation stands to decline. Being culturally aware and able to interact with groups of varying cultures is a key attribute to the success of leaders. Based on the research of cognitive intelligence theory, the concept of culture, and the combined concept of cultural intelligence theory, there is reason to raise the question whether leaders in education are hiring and developing culturally intelligent leaders for the diverse population of the United States.

The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a relationship between the measured levels of cultural intelligence and those principals in a selected school district who were considered effective in the school leader position. The following questions were considered.

Research Questions

The study addressed the following three questions:

1. How do highly effective principals demonstrate high levels of cultural

intelligence?

2. How do highly effective principals recognize levels of personal cultural

intelligence and consciously use this to improve their relationships with others?

3. How do highly effective principals exhibit observable behaviors in their

interactions with teachers, students, and community members, thus demonstrating

a high level of cultural intelligence?

49

The direct involvement of the principal’s leadership leads to the actualization of greater advancements in the areas of teacher engagement, student engagement, and school conditions (Bolman & Deal, 1991; Fullan, 1991; Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999, 2000;

Sergiovanni, 2000; Silins, Mulford, & Leithwood, 2002). Knowing a relationship exists between cultures and education is a prerequisite to effective teaching, but continuing to teach with styles and strategies appropriate only for middle-class Anglo learners fails to meet the needs of culturally diverse children and adolescents” (Barth, 2001, p. 332).

Research has established a direct correlation between principal leadership and effective teachers on school campuses.

This chapter describes the research design related to the study of leadership and culturally intelligent elementary principals in one school district in Northern California.

Included are the research questions and a discussion and justification of the research design and rationale. A definition of case study research is presented. Also included is a detailed explanation of the population sample including a description of those who participated in the study, the procedure used to select the individuals, and an explanation of the sample population. A detailed discussion of the sampling is also presented. This discussion includes a description of the procedures in detail, the specific type of sampling used, the number of individuals and their locations, and why this number was selected as the unit of analysis. Discussion regarding instrumentation is also included and consists of a description of all instruments used and the appropriateness of them in relation to the study. Discussion related to the reliability and validity of the instrumentation and how it

50 was administered and scored is presented. A description of the data analysis, rationale for research design, statistical rationale, data significance on a per-question basis, and case study management is presented in this chapter as well. The chapter concludes with a validation of findings, limitations, projected findings, and a summary.

Population and Sampling

The study was set in the northern region of California. The selection of the region was inspired by the demographic and ethnographic differences in populations found at every school within the geographic region. There is rich variation in race and ethnic backgrounds. The northern region has ethnically diverse principals and serves a diverse socio-economic range of families. The study of individuals from the same geographic region adds substance to the study by ensuring that any delimitation related to geographic differences is avoided. The school leaders who participated in this study were elementary school principals in a northern California School District. The individuals who participated were all principals serving elementary schools within the aforementioned district at the time of the study.

Quantitative Sampling

Within the selected Northern California School District, 39 elementary schools serve pre-kindergarten through sixth grade. All 39 elementary school leaders were selected to participate in the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) (see Appendix A). The principals had all served in the capacity of principal leader for at least one year, and all

51 had served in other administrative capacities prior to being selected as principal.

Examples include positions such as vice principal, program coordinator for Title I schools, afterschool program leaders and one director of facilities. The leaders had all experienced culturally responsive instruction training through the school district. For the purposes of making culturally responsive training transparent, it is defined here.

Gay (2000) defined culturally responsive teaching as using the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, and performance styles of diverse students to make learning more appropriate and effective for them; it teaches to and through the strengths of these students. Gay (2000) also described culturally responsive teaching as having the following characteristics:

It acknowledges the legitimacy of the cultural heritages of different ethnic

groups, both as legacies that affect students' dispositions, attitudes, and

approaches to learning and as worthy content to be taught in the formal

curriculum.

It builds bridges of meaningfulness between home and school experiences as

well as between academic abstractions and lived sociocultural realities.

It uses a wide variety of instructional strategies that are connected to different

learning styles.

It teaches students to know and praise their own and each others' cultural

heritages.

52

It incorporates multicultural information, resources, and materials in all the

subjects and skills routinely taught in schools. (p. 29)

Given the definition of the training, all principal leaders have been exposed to the importance and meaningfulness of bridging home and school experiences as the basis for academic success.

Qualitative Sampling

A case study is an observation of an individual at one moment in time. For this case study, five participants were randomly selected. The number was chosen keeping in mind the study would take place over a four-month time span and in a generally related geographic area or school district. Five participants are enough to observe general thoughts, themes, and recurring patterns (Creswell, 2008). More participants would lead to so much data and analysis it would be overwhelming, and patterns and themes could not be culled out of the data. Since the case study research describes the individual as the unit of analysis and observation, the comparison of five individuals is appropriate.

Once the larger group of principals was given the opportunity to participate in the

Cultural Intelligence Inventory, the Associate Superintendent of Elementary Education for the Northern School District, identified 12 principals, based on the distributed criteria that define a highly effective principal, to be considered for the qualitative aspect of the study. According to McEwan (2003), highly effective principals are good communicators, highly educated, maintain a vision, can facilitate, are masters of change, have the ability to build cultures, can put things into action and motion, can produce

53 results, build character, and contribute to the overall success of mankind. The Associate

Superintendent was given a detailed description of the characteristics defining a highly effective principal. The elementary school years of education are the foundation of a child’s educational experience. There is an extreme need to find ways to improve children’s success at an early age; thus, selecting the smaller group of elementary school principals as the unit of study added and contributed to the body of knowledge collected thus far in relation to the need to employ successful and culturally intelligent elementary school principals.

Once the names were submitted to the researcher, the principals were contacted and asked to participate in the study. A detailed presentation of the study and explanation of the participation requirements were given to the principals prior to their agreement to participate. The final selection of the five participants was random but the fact that the school in which they served as principal met the 60:40 demographic distribution, with no single population exceeding 60% of the total school population, was included in the criterion.

Data Collection Procedures

Multiple steps were included in the data collection since it was a mixed-method study. The first meeting occurred with the Associate Superintendent of Elementary

Education at which the researcher requested help selecting highly effective elementary school principals from the district. The request was for names of approximately 12

54 possible participants to determine five final candidates for the study. The number was flexible however, the number was necessary to identify the top approximate one-third of the entire population of principals. The possible participants were identified using a list of criteria of the 10 traits of highly effective principals established by McEwan (2003).

Once the research proposal was approved by Human Subjects, the entire group of

39 principals was given the opportunity to participate in the Cultural Intelligence

Inventory. Prior to being given the questionnaire (see Appendix A), the 39 principals received a personalized letter (see Appendix B) describing the logistical aspects of the study and requesting their permission and voluntary cooperation to gather confidential data. A week later, the principals received the questionnaire at a meeting designed for this purpose.

The four-factor Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS), including the cover page and informed consent agreement were distributed to the participants. After they received and signed the consent form (see Appendix B), the participants returned the form and the completed survey instrument at the conclusion of the meeting. The meeting was two hours in length. Although the survey instrument recorded factual data pertaining to a participant’s name, age, level of education, and gender, the participant’s name was not included in the final report of the study. The participants were sent an e-mail thanking them for their participation and responses. The compilation and analysis of the data occurred within 60 days of the responses being returned.

55

Both the Associate Superintendent and the principals were informed they would receive a copy of the study, but no names of the schools, the district, or the individuals would be published. After the CQS, the Associate Superintendent chose five of the 39 principals to participate in the qualitative portion of the study. Each of the five principals was told the second half of the study consisted of them participating in a one-on-one interview (see Appendix C) and an observation of daily activities. Observation times and interview times were set up and the interviews and observations took place. Data were collected on a chart for observations (see Appendix D).

The confidentiality of the participants was protected by using code names. Codes identified each survey. Confidentiality control procedures required maintenance of all materials in a locked drawer accessible only to the researcher. Three years after completion of the research, the researcher will shred, bag, and discard the data. The main purpose of this procedure will be to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the individuals who participated in the study.

Instrumentation

A triangulation method of instrumentation was utilized in this study. The three instruments consisted of a 20-question cultural intelligence inventory designed and field tested by the Center for Cultural Intelligence and copyrighted for research use; an in- depth one-on-one interview, with five principals, with specifically designed questions to ensure reflective and thoughtful responses; and a case study observation of the five

56 principals, their actions, interactions and behaviors as they interacted with others on the school campus. The three instruments used in the study combined both a qualitative and a quantitative approach to the collection of data.

The first instrument was the 20-item four-factor CQ Scale developed by cultural intelligence experts Ang et al. (2007) from the Cultural Intelligence Center. The survey had 20 questions related to measuring an individual’s level of cultural intelligence.

According to Cox (1996) in his book Your Opinion, Please: How to Build the Best

Questionnaires in the Field of Education, “A questionnaire is useful only to the extent that it collects accurate information. And for data to be accurate, questionnaire items must be precise” (p. 8). Creswell (2008) suggested, “Instead of creating your own instrument, I would encourage you to locate or modify an existing one” (p. 177). In addition, Creswell believes a good instrument needs to have been developed recently, widely cited by other authors, have published reviews, and be reliable and valid. The cultural intelligence inventory created by the Cultural Intelligence Center used for this study is precise, developed recently, widely tested, cited often, and published, thus making it a valid and reliable instrument for this study.

To test the validity and reliability of the inventory used in this study, Ang and

Van Dyne (2008) conducted six studies using the tool. Study I was a scale development study. In this particular study, the authors looked at the means, mode, standard deviations, scale reliability, and inter-correlations. In Studies II and III, they looked at the ability to generalize across time. In Study IV, they focused on the ability to

57 generalize across countries. In Study V, they looked at the ability to generalize across methods. Finally, in Study VI, they looked at discriminate and incremental validity of the tool. In addition, they conducted a study to look at the regression hierarchical analysis. In the end, they concluded, “the CQS has a clear, robust, and meaningful four factor structure. In addition, results demonstrate that this structure is stable across samples, across time, across countries, and across methods” (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008).

In addition, the authors stated that from a theoretical perspective, findings from these six studies indicated the 20-question CQS holds promise as a reliable and valid measure of

CQ. Potential uses of the scale in substantive research included further exploration of the nature of dimensionality of CQ.

Participants were asked to respond to 20 questions, each relating to one of the four areas of cultural intelligence. The inventory itself consists of 20 questions and uses a 7-point Likert-type scale for participant response. Researchers have stated that a 7- point Likert-type scale is better than a 5-point scale because participants are inclined to respond in the middle with a 3 on the 5-point scale.

The instrument itself focuses on the four areas of cultural intelligence by measuring each one using several related questions. The inventory had four questions measuring an individual’s metacognitive levels of cultural intelligence. Metacognitive cultural intelligence deals with an individual’s level of conscious cultural awareness during cross-cultural interactions. Ang and Van Dyne (2008) stated, “People, with strength in the meta cognitive arenas of cultural intelligence, consciously question their

58 own cultural assumptions, reflect during interactions, and adjust their cultural knowledge when interacting with those from other cultures” (p. 4). The inventory had six questions addressing the cognitive area of cultural intelligence. Ang and Van Dyne noted,

“Cognitive Cultural Intelligence reflects knowledge of norms, practices and conventions in different cultures that has been acquired from educational and personal experiences”

(p. 5).

The inventory had five questions related to the motivational cultural intelligence.

Ang and Van Dyne (2008) noted, “Motivational Cultural Intelligence is a critical component of CQ because it is a source of drive. It triggers effort and energy directed toward functioning in novel cultural settings” (p. 6). Finally, the inventory measured the last area of cultural intelligence, behavioral cultural intelligence with five questions. Ang and Van Dyne noted, “Behavioral Cultural Intelligence reflects the ability to exhibit appropriate verbal and nonverbal actions when interacting with people from different cultures” (p. 6). The 20 questions in the four related areas of cultural intelligence made up the 20-item four-factor CQ Scale used in this study to measure the participants’ levels of cultural intelligence. As is evident by the previous research related to the 20- item four-factor CQ Scale, not only is it reliable in that it measures what is to be measured, it is valid in that the measurements are proven to be consistent over time, across countries, and with various research applications.

In addition to the 20-question cultural intelligence inventory, the five selected principals participated in a one-on-one interview. Each of the participants was asked to

59 share individual demographic information in the interview, including cities lived in, countries traveled to, length of stay, languages spoken, and the individual’s own ethnic background. Participants were then asked to answer detailed open-ended questions relating directly to the four specific areas of cultural intelligence: meta-cognitive, cognitive, motivational, and behavioral.

The order of the questions specifically asked were designed to progress from less invasive and less reflective to more in-depth and more introspective, easing the respondent into conversation, allowing each to feel more comfortable and become more candid over time as the relationship between interviewer and interviewee developed. The utilization of this technique leads to a richness in the data collection and more reliable responses.

Finally, an ethnographic field study took place with an observation of each participant. Observations occurred and data were collected over a single day. The participants were observed in action, in their daily interactions and dealings with students, parents, staff, and teachers. The data was collected, interviews were recorded, and a code book was organized and used to keep track of recurring themes. After the manual coding, an organizational process of segregating and categorizing data completed the task. Themes, patterns, and similarities between the five selected principals were noted.

60

Research Design

The mixed methods study first quantitatively measured the sample of 39 principal leaders in a northern California school district using a 20-question cultural intelligence inventory (CQS). The intention of the investigation was to explore the degree of association between the variables and provide information for more causal studies that may follow (Creswell, 2008). One purpose of the research was to compare 34 of the 39 principal leaders with five of the 39 elementary school principals who were deemed highly effective by their superintendents and randomly selected from the larger group, using a 20-question cultural intelligence inventory (CQS).

The quantitative approach to the mixed methods study was appropriate because the study focused on statistical analysis and relationships between variables via narrow, specific questions, and used numbers to present the analysis approached objectively without bias (Creswell, 2008). Creswell stated the quantitative researcher seeks to describe trends and explain relationships among variables. In quantitative research, the researcher uses narrow and specific questions or instruments to collect data to be reported statistically.

The qualitative researcher has a goal to learn about the phenomenon by arranging a series of interviews to uncover possible themes or descriptions (Gliner & Morgan,

2000). In this study, the two qualitative areas were identifiable and an analysis was conducted to derive at the conclusions by finding common themes and detailed interactions within the context of the data. According to Stake (1995), “Qualitative

61 researchers have a respectable concern for validation of observations. They have routines for triangulation that approximate in purpose these quantitative fields but they don’t have widely agreed upon protocols that put subjective misunderstandings to the test” (p. 45).

The researcher employed one instrument for the quantitative study, the academically validated and reliable four-factor Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS), by permission of the copywriters at The Cultural Intelligence Center, LLC. The research entailed the administration of the survey to a sample of 39 principal leaders in a northern

California school district. Each of the surveys was analyzed and detailed on several means charts in Microsoft Excel.

The design of the first section of research was correlational to demonstrate the degree of effect. The unbiased nature of the numeric results of this quantitative correlational design was important to the study’s attempt to explain the degree of relationship between cultural intelligence and transformational leadership as they relate to the principal leader’s performance. Because school districts in California, like districts across the nation, have continued to show little gains for success with regard to African

American, Hispanic, and second language learners, the research allows for the possibility of leaders to better understand the statistical relevance of the issues related to cultural intelligence and leadership. Principals must meet the needs of the community, staff, and students and accomplish more than just a friendly atmosphere. All groups, regardless of ethnicity, language, or other diversities must feel their culture is welcome at the school

62 site. The school should not only be inviting but sensitive to the cultures by embracing those differences.

Using the mixed methods approach in the study of principal leaders ensured accuracy and validity in the data collection and analysis. The purpose was to triangulate the qualitative and quantitative methods so the emergent patterns and themes might be seen in multiple areas of the data. It is through this emergence of common data that reliability and validity strengthened the results of the study. One of the advantages of this approach is the close collaboration between the researcher and the participant while participants told their stories (Crabtree & Miller, 1999). Through the stories, the participants were able to describe their views of reality, thus enabling the researcher to better understand the participants’ actions (Lather, 1992; Robottom & Hart, 1993).

Creswell (2008) stated, “It is typical in qualitative research to study few individuals or cases. This is because the overall ability of the researcher to provide an in-depth picture diminishes with the addition of each individual or site added” (p. 271).

A case study provides the researcher with a multitude of data to be combined, allowing a bigger picture of the case studied to form. Thomas (2011) offers the following definition of case study:

Case studies are analyses of persons, events, decisions, periods, projects, policies, institutions, or other systems that are studied holistically by one or more methods. The case that is the subject of the inquiry will be an instance of a class of phenomena that provides an analytical frame — an object — within which the study is conducted and which the case illuminates and explicates. (Thomas, 2011)

63

Thus, case study research of five principal leaders deemed highly successful by their superintendent involved the use of a survey, an observation of the impact of cultural intelligence, and an in-depth interview related to the research questions to enhance the possibility of obtaining conclusive data. The elementary school principals given the quantitative cultural intelligence inventory represented the entire principal administrative staff of a large northern California school district. From the larger population, five school principals were randomly selected for the case studies. To further qualify for the study, each of the five represented schools must have been diverse such that no more than

60% of the total population was of the same race or demographic group.

The five selected principal leaders were additionally given a seven-question detailed, personal, one-on-one, reflective interview and were observed to determine if elementary school principals considered highly effective by their superintendents also had higher levels of measureable, observable, and reflective levels of cultural intelligence.

Data Analysis

Finally, the data was analyzed using an open coding approach to identify themes and categories. These emerged from the interviews and the statistical results of the 20- question inventory scale. These data were analyzed to determine if the individual’s overall cultural intelligence score, as well as the individual score in each of the four areas, was significant enough to see patterns. The questions were ranked and descriptive

64 statistics were used to illustrate similarities and differences between the questions, sections, and the overall results of the 20-question CQ questionnaire. The specific behaviors and observations were recorded and recurring themes and patterns were analyzed and disaggregated according to the various answers.

65

Chapter 4

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction

Comprehensive case studies of the relationship between cultural intelligence and principal leaders at five elementary schools reveal a number of important findings. These patterns were uncovered using a conceptual framework informed by current literature in the field. More specifically, in designing this framework, the researcher reviewed the following bodies of literature: educational leaders in the 21st century, theory of intelligence, background of cognitive psychology, cultural contributions of anthropology, the background of intelligence testing, the theory of cultural intelligence, and research related to effective principal leaders.

From the aforementioned areas emerged a paradigm for the type of leadership needed to successfully serve multiple ethnic groups represented by various languages and cultures. In particular, the literature suggested parents, students, and teachers representative of multiple cultures and backgrounds need a principal leader sensitive to the differences these individuals bring to the setting. Principal selection and training are critical to successful schools and student progress.

One purpose of the current study was to quantify the degree to which principal leaders, deemed highly effective by the associate superintendent of a specific northern school district, exhibit higher levels of cultural intelligence than their colleagues. The

66 second purpose was to determine if these same principals were consciously aware of their cultural intelligence and exhibited behaviors of cultural intelligence in their day to day activities as they lead the schools. This quantitative correlational study determined the degree to which the elementary principals in one specific school district, and the elementary principals’ cultural intelligence and leadership availability, shared common variance (Creswell, 2008) based on data collected and a correlational statistic calculated at one point. This chapter reports the findings of a mixed methods study compiling quantitative data from a survey given to 39 principal leaders measuring their levels of cultural intelligence and includes a phenomenological qualitative case study designed to provide a better understanding of the backgrounds, actions, and experiences of five randomly selected principals from the larger population through one-on-one interviews.

The study focused on the following research questions in the compilation of both quantitative and qualitative data:

(1) How do highly effective principals demonstrate high levels of cultural

intelligence?

(2) How do highly effective principals recognize their personal cultural intelligence

and consciously use this information to improve their interactions?

(3) How do highly effective principals exhibit observable behaviors in their

interactions with parents, students, and teachers, thus demonstrating high levels of

cultural intelligence?

67

The 20-item four-factor Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) was developed and cross-validated for reliability across samples, time, and countries (Ang et al., 2007) by the Cultural Intelligence Center, LLC. The CQS measures meta-cognitive CQ, cognitive

CQ, behavior CQ, and motivational CQ. The present research study utilized the CQS to measure the cultural competence of the principal leaders of the northern California

School District. The various domains of CQ were scored and interpreted for the current research as follows: meta-cognitive CQ was interpreted as meaning strategy-making CQ; cognitive CQ means knowledge of other cultures; behavior CQ relates to culturally intelligent action; and motivational CQ was defined as a CQ drive to gain cultural intelligence.

The current study included 39 participants. All the participants in this research were principal leaders of the selected California school district in Northern California.

The sample composition included mixed gender, ethnicity, years of administrative service, and experiences with other languages and cultures. See Figure 1 for the ethnic representation of the school district student body as a whole.

68

Figure 1 Ethnic Representation of Northern California School District Student Body

District Ethnicity Distribution

1%

8% White 29% African American 20% Latino Asian Pacific Islander 22% 20% American Indian

Quantitative Data Analysis

A correlation design was appropriate for the present study as a method by which the research measured the degree of relationship between two or more variables to indicate whether the variables were related or if one could predict the other (Creswell,

2008). The design of the current quantitative research study was to correlate the relationship between the independent variables of cultural intelligence (CQ) represented by the larger sample of 34 principals and compare the results to the cultural intelligence

(CQ) of the five selected highly effective principals.

69

Research Question 1 How do highly effective principals demonstrate high levels of cultural intelligence?

The first question of the study was answered through the use of a questionnaire developed by the Cultural Intelligence Center. The 20-question cultural intelligence inventory utilized a 7-point Likert-type scale for responses from the 39 principals serving in the district. The questions on the inventory were designed to measure an individual’s overall cultural intelligence level. Furthermore, the inventory measured the individual’s level of cultural intelligence in four specific subcategories of cultural intelligence, metacognitive, cognitive, behavioral, and motivational. The 20-question cultural intelligence inventory was given to all 39 participants during a scheduled meeting along with their forms of consent to participate in the study. One hundred percent of the forms and inventories were returned to the researcher.

The CQ Scale used an equal interval linear numeric Likert-type scale. No changes were necessary for the scoring. The CQ Scale contained seven alternative responses to the statements, which ranged from 1= Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly

Agree. Given the seven alternatives and 20 questions, the total possible CQS score was

140 per participant. Figure 2 shows the CQS mean scores of the 34 principals compared to the five selected principals.

70

Figure 2 CQS Mean Scores of Thirty-nine Principals

6 5.28 5 4.254 4

3 Mean Score of Selected 2 Mean Score of Remaining Pool

1

0

The 39 principals in the study were selected because of the diversity of the school district and because they were part of the group from which the superintendent would choose those who matched the criteria for highly effective principals. Overall, the differences between the larger group of 34 principals and the selected five chosen by the superintendent were across all subcategories of the inventory. In the metacognitive subcategory, the group of five principals outscored the larger population by at least one point in each category. In the cognitive subgroup, the selected five principals scored only slightly below the larger population in two of the subcategories but displayed greater strength in four of the six subcategories. In the areas of motivation and behavior, the five principals reflected extremely high levels of cultural intelligence as compared to the overall larger population.

71

The five principals selected for the study, based on the criteria for process selection, were known by the district to be considered highly effective principals. Each performed effectively at the school site assigned to them. The survey results indicate the selected five principals do have levels of measured cultural intelligence higher than the

34 other principals not selected. Figure 3 shows the CQS mean scores for each of the five principals using the means of the overall Likert-type scale scores. This instrument, validated and tested in business, industry, and education, indicates all five of the selected principals scored well over average (3.5) on the instrument. The remaining 34 principals had an overall cultural intelligence mean score of 3.89.

Figure 3 Overall Cultural Intelligence Inventory Score by Selected Principal

7 6.54

6 5.48 5.02 4.95 4.65 5

4 Overall Mean Score 3

2

1

0 Principal A Principal B Principal C Principal D Principal E

Earley et al.’s (2006) work supports the results. He stated, “Cultural Intelligence theory was developed to answer the question why some function more successfully in

72 culturally diverse situations than others” (p. 3). It is imperative principals understand the challenges students experience both in the home and the work environment.

Analysis of Cultural Intelligence Subgroups

Motivational. The highest scoring subgroup was that of motivational cultural intelligence. Principals were all very motivated to embrace their communities and find ways to better serve the diverse student and parent population at the sites. The cultural intelligence inventory indicates the selected five principals scored at 5.4 in enjoying their communication with unfamiliar cultures and 6.6 in both enjoying interactions with other cultures and experiencing conditions or learning about others. Comparatively speaking, while the 34 principals scored far above the medial 3.5 in the category of motivation, they scored a minimum of 1 point lower than the selected five principals in all subcategories (see Figure 4).

73

Figure 4 Motivational Intelligence Subgroup Results

6.6 6.6 7 6.2 6.2 5.52 5.4 6 5.2 4.92 4.44 5 4.48 4 Mean Score 3 of Selected 2 1 Mean Score of

0

Remaining

Pool

Enjoy7 Enjoy7 living in

4.

Socialize with local

unfamiliarcultures

other culturesother

Deal with stresses

unfamiliarcultures

Shopping Shopping conditions

2.

Enjoying Enjoying interactions of

3.

5.

other culturesother (learning)

adjusting to other to adjusting other cultures 1.

Behavioral. The second highest scoring subgroup was in the category of behavioral cultural intelligence. This is an individual’s ability to deal with the changes needed during interactions with those from varying cultures. The score on behavioral cultural intelligence was far above the mean score of 3.5 and in some areas as high as 6.5.

The selected five principals have a significantly larger number by a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 2.3 (see Figure 5). The behavioral cultural intelligence deals specifically with nonverbal behavior during interactions with others.

74

Figure 5 Behavioral Subgroup Results

7 6.4 6.4 6.4 5.8 6 6 4.44 4.52 4.56 5 4.28 4.28 4 Mean Score of 3 Selected 2 1

0

behavior

Change non Change non verbal

situation requires situation

Vary Vary speaking rate as

4.

Change Change verbal behavior

Use Use pause and silence in

3.

in cultural in interactions

Alter facial experesions Alter facialexperesions in

cross culturalcrossinteractions

1.

2. cross culturalcrossinteractions

5.

The most dramatic difference in this category occurred in the subcategory of changing verbal behaviors in cultural interactions. The five selected principals scored

2.12 points higher than the 34 remaining principals in this area. When studied in the qualitative section, the study will reflect that these chosen principals did in fact display a noticeable behavioral change when interacting with those of other cultures.

Metacognitive. Metacognitive cultural intelligence is aligned with the actual IQ and emotional intelligence found in cognitive psychology. This thought is supported by the research of Daniel Goleman (1995) who stated, “We send emotional signals in every

75 encounter, and those signals affect those we are with. Emotional intelligence includes managing this exchange” (p. 115).

The exchange to which Goleman referred is measured in the metacognitive subgroup of the cultural intelligence inventory. It is made up of the signals sent and the adjustment of those signals in intercultural interactions. In this section, all the principals scored much higher than the mean score of 3.5 and the selected five principals scored well above that median. The highest scoring subcategory was that of adjusting cultural knowledge, which was 6.6 out of a possible 7 points. In each case, the principals were very cognizant of their knowledge in crosscultural interactions and were sensitive to how they interacted. There was a high level of competence in the area of metacognitive cultural intelligence as indicated by the scores of all 39 principals (see Figure 6).

76

Figure 6 Metacognitive Subgroup Results

7 6.6 6.2 5.8 6 5.28 5.04 5.2 4.68 4.72 5 4 Mean Score of 3 Selected 2 Mean Score of Remaining Pool 1

0

Adjustcultureal

interactions

knowledge knowledge use

Conscious of cultural

2.

Check accuracy during

knowledge/ unfamiliarknowledge/

Conscious of knowledge Conscious of knowledge

1.

4. in crossculture in interactions 3.

Cognitive. The lowest scores of the four subcategories were that of the cognitive subgroup. This is likely attributed to the fact that the principals, on a daily basis, relied on their personal experiences and reflective knowledge from past experiences when dealing with those from varying cultures.

Since this area was the lowest cumulative score among the five selected principals as well as among the 34 remaining of the larger group, it is an area in which further options for professional development could be considered. As Crowne (2008) stated, to become familiar with norms and cultures of other groups, it is ideal to be exposed to those groups, especially on a regular basis. In this section, the principals were

77 responding about the knowledge they had acquired formally and not on the experiential knowledge they would acquire by their experiences of being in daily contact with those of other cultures.

The highest subcategory in the cognitive area or that of knowledge was 4.2 representing the knowledge principals have regarding cultural values and religious beliefs. The second highest score was 3.8 in knowing the rules for expressing non-verbal behaviors. The lowest subcategory of the entire inventory was in knowing about rules to depict non-verbal behaviors. While this category indicates the lowest among the four areas, it still reflects two scores in the sub-categories at or above the mid-range of 3.5

(see Figure 7).

Figure 7 Cognitive Subgroup Results

4.2 4.5 4 3.8 3.2 3.32 3.2 3.28 3.5 3.04 3.04 3 2.84 3 2.8 2.8 Mean Score 2.5 of Selected 2 1.5 Mean Score 1 of Remaining 0.5 Pool

0

behaviors

Knowing Knowing rules for

Knowing Knowing legal and

Knowing Knowing marriage

Knowing Knowing cultural

economic economic systems

Knowing Knowing the andarts 6.

expressing expressing nonverbal

Knowing Knowing the rules and

1.

4.

crafts of other of other cultures crafts

3.

systems of other of systems other cultures

5.

values and values religious beliefs 2. vocabulary of other of vocabularyother cultures

78

Summary

Survey results suggest the large group of 34 principals scored markedly higher than the mean score of 3.5. The selected five principals from the larger group scored even higher than the 34-member group. In this particular school district, according to the quantitative measurement tool, the principals are functioning more successfully in culturally diverse situations than those who scored 3.5 or lower in other studies across the country.

Knowing the participating principals had all been trained in culturally relevant educational techniques and had knowledge regarding a CRT approach to education, it can be surmised that this training along with several other culturally focused professional development sessions offered to the principals has added to their cultural intelligence levels. Additionally, the diversity of the district as a whole lends itself to more exposure to and opportunity with those of various cultures and backgrounds. The principals involved have had the opportunity to experience a wide range of various options for further educational familiarity with diverse groups.

Qualitative Data Analysis

The research methodology for this section of the study involved a combination of five case studies of research with the 20-question CQS. The one-on-one interview consisted of a seven-question detailed, personal, reflective interview to determine if the selected five school principals, considered highly effective by their superintendent, also

79 had high levels of measured, observable, and reflective levels of cultural intelligence.

The researcher’s goal in the design of the study was to triangulate the methods for both the quantitative and qualitative studies, thus compiling the patterns and themes that emerged in a way so as to illustrate recurrences from the multiple areas of data collection.

Through this process, the validity and reliability of the findings would be defensible.

For this particular study, five principal leaders were selected as the unit of study.

According to John Creswell (2008), “It is typical in qualitative research to study few individuals or cases. This is because the overall ability of the researcher to provide an in- depth picture diminishes with the addition of each individual or site” (p. 217). The three types of methods were selected because together they represent a means to describe a unique phenomenon based on effective principals and their levels of measured cultural intelligence, their observable level of cultural intelligence, and their awareness of their own culturally intelligent interactions with students, parents, and staff.

Population and Sample

The population selected for the case studies was a group of principals selected by their associate superintendent using specific criteria to identify highly effective principals. As previously mentioned, the five case studies were a representative sample of the larger population of 39 principals. Creswell (2008) explained that a representative refers to the selection of individuals from a sample population. In this study, the five individuals selected were typical of the population, thus enabling the researcher to draw conclusions about the larger population. The five principals selected for the case studies

80 had a collective total of 107 years in education. They collectively had over 52 years serving in educational administrative positions and a total of 37 collective years in the role of school principal.

Principal A had been in the field of education for 20 years. Principal A had 12 years in administration, three as a vice principal and a total of nine in the position of principal at a school. Other than English, Principal A spoke seven languages including

French, Urdu, German, Kutchi, Swahili, Gujerati, and Spanish. Principal A had traveled to 22 countries. These travels include the regions of Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.

She lived outside the United States for 31 years. Principal A’s school population demographic is illustrated in Table 1 and Figure 8.

Table 1

School Demographics for Principal A

Total student enrollment 1207

Students with Disabilities 7.7%

English Learners 33.64%

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 81.61%

81

Figure 8 Student Ethnicity Representation at School A

2.49 3.65 2.65 African –American 24.52 American Indian Asian Filipino 0.08 Hispanic or Latino 15.82 Pacific Islander 48.3 White Two or more 2.49

Principal B served in the area of education a total of 21 years. Five of the 21 years had been spent in school administration. Two of those years in administration were as a vice principal and three as principal of a school site. Principal B did not speak any language other than English. While Principal B had traveled outside the United States on several occasions, all years were spent living in the state of California. Principal B’s school population demographic is illustrated in Table 2 and Figure 9.

82

Table 2

School Demographics for Principal B

Total student enrollment 1057

Students with Disabilities 8%

English Learners 37.84%

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 78.52%

Figure 9 Student Ethnicity Representation at School B

2.07 4.7 5.27 African –American 19.85 American Indian 0 Asian Filipino Hispanic or Latino Pacific Islander 39.98 26.9 White Two or more

1.22

Principal C had been in the field of education for 29 years; 16 of those were devoted to administration. Of the total years, Principal C served as a principal for 12.

Four years were spent in the role of vice principal. Principal C did not speak any

83 language other than English and never lived or traveled outside the United States.

Principal C’s school population demographic is illustrated in Table 3 and Figure 10.

Table 3

School Demographics for Principal C

Total student enrollment 1079

Students with Disabilities 6%

English Learners 15.20%

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 32.62%

Figure 10 Student Ethnicity Representation at School C

7.6 0.46 13.16 African –American American Indian Asian 23.61 Filipino 25.02 Hispanic or Latino Pacific Islander 1.39 White 17.42 12.33 Two or more

Principal D devoted 20 years to the field of education. Nine of the years were in the area of administration while five were in the role of principal of a school site. Two

84 years were dedicated to overseeing an after school program and two were as vice principal. Principal D spoke English and no other language. While he has always lived in the United States, he traveled outside the United States to Mexico and Canada, as well as to several states within the United States. Principal D’s school population demographic is illustrated in Table 4 and Figure 11.

Table 4

School Demographics for Principal D

Total student enrollment 683

Students with Disabilities 3.9%

English Learners 20.94%

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 48.32%

Figure 11 Student Ethnicity Representation at School D

0.73 8.93 10.25 African –American American Indian

20.2 16.4 Asian Filipino Hispanic or Latino 7.91 Pacific Islander 1.46 White Two or more 34.11

85

Principal E had 17 years in the field of education. Ten of those years were devoted to the area of school administration. He served as a principal for eight of his total years. Two years were devoted to the position of vice principal. While he spoke no language other than English, he traveled extensively outside the state of California to several Eastern states and some in the mid-West. Additionally, he traveled to Canada and

Mexico outside the United States. Principal E’s school population demographic is illustrated in Table 5 and Figure 12.

Table 5

School Demographics for Principal E

Total student enrollment 939

Students with Disabilities 8.2%

English Learners 23.75%

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 69.65%

86

Figure 12 Student Ethnicity Representation at School E

8.09 African –American 19.49 10.22 American Indian 3.09 0.11 Asian Filipino Hispanic or Latino 25.13 Pacific Islander 30.14 White Two or more

3.73

Data Collection Procedures

Once IRB approval was given for the study, the participating principals signed a consent form and were informed of any possible effects this study would have on them.

The data collected for the qualitative study were kept confidential and anonymous. The identity of the individuals, the records, notes, surveys, and behavioral observation matrix recording sheets were kept in a locked cabinet and were secure at all times during the study. The collected data will be destroyed at the end of three years by shredding and destroying all documents related to the study.

The data for the study were gathered using three methods, ensuring the richness of the findings by triangulating the methods. The first method, the CQS, was previously described in detail with regard to Research Question 1. Research Question 2 regarding

87 how principals recognize and consciously use their knowledge and cultural intelligence was answered through the one-on-one in-depth interviews. Finally, Research Question 3 on the revealing and demonstration of observable behaviors was answered by the observations at each school site.

The one-on-one interviews and observations were scheduled over a 10-day period. Each principal met with the researcher in person while the interview was conducted; each interview lasted approximately one hour. The observations were scheduled to follow each of the interviews. The questions were asked and probes were used when necessary to clarify any of the questions. No other questions were asked other than what was written prior to the interview. Participants were reflective, and information was provided throughout the course of the interview as well as during the observation.

The researcher conducted each observation immediately following each interview. During the observation, the researcher was non-participatory in the actions occurring at the school site as well as in interactions between the principal and parents, students, or staff. The researcher recorded observations of the interactions and stood far enough away as to not interfere with the outcomes. Observations lasted between two and three hours or until saturation was experienced. Saturation is defined as occurring when the data begin to repeat and when no new additional information was collected. A tally of the actions of the individuals of the four major subculture groups was recorded on the

Chart of Observations (see Appendix D).

88

Subgroup Analysis

Behavioral. A principal’s ability to interact effectively with those from varying cultures falls under the subgroup of behavioral intelligence. Qualitatively, the five principals scored high on an invisible scale measuring their behavioral intelligence.

Often, principals were seen altering their tone, their facial expression, and/or their physical approach to the student, parent or teacher with whom they were communicating.

Principal C remarked in the interview,

I try to make certain to give the individuals more time to express themselves. Especially, when there is a possible second language barrier involved. Additionally, I make certain that both the mom and dad are given equal opportunity to voice their opinions.

Principal A commented:

I give a lot of hugs, shake a lot of hands, and nod my understanding during interactions with my parents, teachers and students. They need to know that my office is a safe place to express their thoughts and feelings.

The responses from the cultural intelligence inventory, along with the responses from the five case studies, indicate the principals studied were aware of their nonverbal actions and the impact of their interactions. These principals all agreed they adjusted accordingly in order to let those of other cultures know they were open and supportive of them and their successes. In looking at research question 1, “How do highly effective principals demonstrate their levels of cultural intelligence?”, it is evident that making cognitive choices of behavior to show acceptance and support is a critical part of the demonstration.

89

Metacognitive. Metacognitive cultural intelligence is the management of the exchange between the principal being studied and those who are participating in the exchange. Metacognitive is the conscious exchange of information during the conversation. An individual with high metacognitive cultural intelligence has the ability to adjust, read the signals during the intercultural exchange, and find ways to show he/she is embracing the opportunity of conversation with the individual. Daniel Goleman

(1995) supported this concept and stated, “We send emotional signals in every encounter, and those signals affect those we are with. The more adroit we are socially, the better we control the signals we send. Emotional Intelligence includes managing this exchange” (p.

115).

Principals who display a strong metacognitive cultural intelligence show confidence in their knowledge in interacting and communicating with those of other cultures. Of the five principals studied, three of them made specific comments about adjusting the conversation to match the behaviors of the individuals with whom they were communicating. Principals who are strong in the metacognitive area of cultural intelligence modify their behavior and respond to the interaction positively.

The reactions and observations of principals adjusting their communication to ensure the interaction was a positive one is a strong indication of metacognitive cultural intelligence. As the individuals continue to develop metacognitive cultural intelligence, they become more intuitive and learn what behaviors are required and how to execute them more effectively. Principal E indicated that he has learned that one specific cultural

90 group are more comfortable communicating when he leaves his office and meets with them in an open, quiet area as opposed to his office. Principal B shared that she knows how much time to set on her calendar because she knows her community groups so well.

Some individuals of certain ethnicities require more processing time than others. The principals studied all showed an intuitive skill in their interactions with those of various cultures.

Motivational. The next highest scoring subgroup was that of motivational cultural intelligence. This section addresses the enjoyment of interactions, socialization, adjustments, and learning to live in other cultures. It also includes the positive attitude of the principals toward thinking they could and would enjoy such an experience. Being the principal leader of a very diverse school offers numerous opportunities for interacting with people of other cultures. In some cases, the principals are so involved in the community; they are even invited to events within and among the families. One principal stated, “When invited, I always try to attend the cultural events occurring in our community to show support and respect to the families.” Thomas (2006) expressed his theory of cultural intelligence and stated it was an interlocking of abilities that could not be measured in isolation. Given Thomas’ theory, the fact that all five of the principals studied believed they could and would enthusiastically embrace another experience outside the United States with different cultures reflected a competence in this area.

All principals adamantly stated they truly enjoyed their interactions with the other cultures represented at the school sites and felt they had the ability to interact with ease.

91

Principal A stated, “I really enjoy my interactions with the families at my diverse school.

They are part of the bigger family and here we have a very multicultural family.” Each of the principals was motivated to learn more about the families at their diverse schools.

The interview and the literature from the principals help answer research question 1 and determine along with the higher quantitative measures on the CQ inventory that effective principal leaders do have a higher measurement of cultural intelligence.

Cognitive. The participants as a whole scored the lowest on the cognitive subgroup of the multiple intelligence inventory. The lower score is likely attributed to the fact that only one of the five principals in the selected group had lived and traveled extensively outside the United States. The literature supported by Kerry Crowne (2008), stated, “Developing an understanding of another culture is gained from experiences in that culture; this it is thought, will eventually lead to a deeper understanding of a culture’s norms” (p. 15). It is through various items of literature that the emphasis in building cultural intelligence is strengthened by becoming familiar with the values, assumptions, and the everyday ways of life the individuals experience prior to coming to the United

States.

Cognitive cultural intelligence is the knowledge one has regarding the diversity, the customs, religion, and traditions of varying cultures. The principals interviewed indicated they had not traveled extensively and, thus had not had experiences outside the

United States. As gleaned from the interview, all the principals indicated their personal experiences had attributed greatly to their knowledge and sensitivity to managing

92 situations and communication skills with other cultures. It is the experiential knowledge that has given these principals a strong understanding of the culture’s norms of the communities they are leading. Most of the principals involved placed much value on the experiential knowledge they acquired on their own through their experiences with other cultures. Principal C shared, “One day, I will have the opportunity to travel to other countries and experience the cultures of my school first hand. Until then, I have to gain my knowledge from reading and learning from leaders in my diverse cultural community.” Since cultural intelligence is developed through interacting with others, the principals of this diverse school district have numerous opportunities on a daily basis to gain that knowledge and, thus develop their cognitive intelligence.

Research Question 2 How do highly effective principals recognize their own cultural intelligence and consciously use this to improve their interactions?

A one-on-one, in-depth interview using open-ended questions was used to determine if highly effective principals recognized their own cultural intelligence and made conscious efforts to improve their interactions with those of other cultures. The seven in-depth questions were designed specifically to elicit in-depth, personal responses dealing directly with cultural intelligence awareness and strategies. If three or more principals responded the same way, the information was coded accordingly and then considered a theme or pattern. This coding method allowed for patterns and themes to emerge that were both valid and reliable.

93

The meaning of cultural intelligence. The term cultural intelligence, as defined by Ang and Van Dyne (2008), is “an individual’s capability to function and manage effectively in culturally diverse settings.” Each principal was asked to give a personal definition of what cultural intelligence meant in their interactions with others. Principal D stated, “Cultural intelligence is the understanding of other people, where they are coming from and trying to put yourself in their shoes.” While each of the five principals had a different response, each shared that it was about being aware of their own actions and reactions when dealing with those of various cultures.

One recurring theme in the answers was that of being sensitive to the needs of others, showing respect for other cultures, and valuing what other cultures have to offer to the situation. Each of the principals was motivated to learn more about the various cultures represented at the school site. Each principal studied had an awareness of diverse families, knew about their customs, and had made an effort to encourage others to embrace the diversity of the school they served. Goleman (2008) spoke to intelligent people having a self-awareness of their actions. It was through his very definition that the five studied principals expressed their reflective thoughts regarding how they thought and reacted to others using cultural intelligence. The awareness of both the concept of cultural intelligence and the participants’ personal sense of cultural intelligence gave them a precise foundation from which to answer the remaining questions during the interview process.

94

The principals were then asked to reflect and discuss what they knew about people from various cultures. The three specific ethnic groups of the inquiry included

Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and African Americans. Each principal was asked to reflect on what they knew of the characteristics and cultures and what they knew about the communication styles of each group.

Reflective knowledge of the Hispanic American, Asian American, and African

American populations. The overarching theme emerging among the principals was that culture does make a difference. Culture of a people separates and distinguishes the members of one group of people from another. The principals interviewed had similar thoughts and statements regarding cultural differences and their understanding of

Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and African Americans.

Hispanic Americans were viewed by all case study principals to be very family- oriented. Principals thought this particular culture often showed physical affection to demonstrate their feelings about their children. Principals generally thought Hispanic parents did not feel comfortable at the school site and were often intimidated by the administration. One principal stated, “I always make certain that I have another Hispanic person available during a meeting with Hispanic parents. Not only does it make them feel more comfortable, if there is need for translation, no one feels uncomfortable.”

Research done by Geert Hofstede (2006) closely aligns and supports this assumption.

Hofstede (2006) found cultures with a large power distance, or the less powerful, accepted the power relations that are autocratic and paternalistic. Subordinates

95 acknowledge the power of others based on their formal hierarchical positions. The principals studied all reflected on Hispanic American parents as appearing to feel either ill at ease or uncomfortable during school meetings. Principal C commented that possibly the language barrier and lack of total understanding of the academic expectations contributed to the uneasiness of the parent. It is this possibility motivating

Principal C to continue to find ways to celebrate the Hispanic population at the school site as well as to offer parent education regarding academic expectations to ensure the parents feel welcome and at ease with the academic setting for their children.

Further, principals stated the male was the disciplinarian in the Hispanic family while the mother appeared more trusting of the school and just wanted things to go smoothly. Overall, principals thought Hispanic females thought their places were in the home and the more dominant male was the authority figure and should communicate with the school for academic and discipline issues.

Knowledge of Asian Americans was similar among the studied principals, specifically to the Chinese and Japanese cultures. Each felt Asian Americans held academic success in high regard. Principals assumed those families new to the country had a need to learn more about the academic expectations and basic educational system of the United States. The academic success and seriousness for the educational experience was simply the expectation of the Asian American parent. Principal D reflected that the Asian American parents at his school wanted frequent communication with the teacher regarding the progress of their students. Another principal shared that

96 two Asian American parents had come and asked that the school consider offering an extended instrumental music opportunity for students. Additionally, Principal A reflected that her Asian American families were eager to be involved in all academic opportunities offered students at the school. In one case, the parent became part of the team of reviewers for the science fair projects. In most cases, the principals reported that the

Asian American parents were professional, working families. They were unobtrusive during events even when their children were being rewarded for academic success.

Hofstede’s (2006) philosophy of a unity within a group of people was supported by the observations of the principals. Further, principals felt the father took on the role of disciplinarian in the Asian American culture and was generally the one to communicate with the schoolteacher and administrator. Knowing about and reflecting on the various cultural traits of the Asian American families generally helped the principal leaders with their interactions regarding that population. One principal remarked she had come to understand that the expectations of her Asian American parents is the students will perform and give 100% to their academic studies. Since this is the expectation, often the

Asian American parent is not as interested in the award for completion. Understanding the cultural expectations of families and the way in which the home is structured for academics points to the cultural intelligence of the effective principal.

The mothers of the African American population were thought to be representative of the family during school interactions. The mother was generally the disciplinarian; however, one principal stated a recently begun program inviting “Dads” to

97 the school site was a great motivator for dads and particularly African American dads to be more involved at the site. Three of the five schools studied had implemented the

“Dads” program on the campus. All three involved principals mentioned it had increased the involvement of the African American dads.

Building trust was a common theme that emerged among the principals when discussing the establishment of a relationship with the African American families. Once the trust was built, four of the principals said a foundation for a relationship with the school was begun. Overall, African American culture was family-oriented and supportive of the progress at the school. It was also noted that awards were important to mark the success of the African American students.

Overall, the principals interviewed all reflected on their knowledge of the various cultures at the school site. It is their understanding and knowledge of the various cultures supporting the idea that the principal who had higher cultural intelligence was aware of the unique cultural differences among individuals and, thus makes every effort to be sensitive and understanding to those needs. When a principal uses cultural proficiency as a lens through which to develop their personal and professional growth, they become leaders committed to educating all students to high levels through knowing, valuing, and using the students’ cultural backgrounds, languages, and learning styles within the selected curricular and instructional contexts (Lindsey et al., 2009).

Communication styles of Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and African

Americans. Each of the five principals interviewed offered insight into the various

98 communication styles of individuals from different cultures. It was generally agreed that while the Hispanic American parents were typically more quiet, there was often a need for bilingual assistance to determine underlying problems with the students.

Additionally, four of the five principals mentioned Hispanic Americans felt more comfortable when another person from their culture was in the room during meetings with the administrative staff. Principal B mentioned that she had set aside extra money each year from her school budget to make certain bilingual support was always available at the site.

Communication styles of the Asian Americans varied depending on the cultural background of the individual. For most Chinese and Japanese parents, meetings were an exchange of ideas between the administrator and the parents. Education was held in high regard and most Asian Americans saw themselves as partners in the education of the student. At one school, in a neighborhood where a culture of Hmong students and parents resided, a somewhat different approach for communication occurred to do what was best for the students. The parents of these students needed additional information and meetings to simply understand the educational system and, thus the expectations of students in California. A bilingual support staff attended all the informational meetings to ensure the system was explained clearly. Principal B stated it was simply a difference in prior experiences regarding education that caused the problem with the communication and understanding. Ang et al. (2007) supported Principal B when saying:

When individuals relocate to unfamiliar cultures, they often experience stress because norms and behaviors are unfamiliar and confusing. Research on

99

intercultural encounters demonstrates the importance of cultural adaptation. Cultural adaptation includes the sociocultural sense of adjustment and psychological feelings of wellbeing. (p. 103)

Developing relationships with parents new to the country and helping instruct them about

American education is of utmost importance to building the relationships as well as to the success of the student for all cultures involved.

The style of communication regarding African American culture was described similarly from school to school. Most African American parents want to vent their concerns, disappointments, and struggles not only with what is happening in relation to the school but personally. Principal C determined that calmly and respectfully listening and being attentive was the best way to build a relationship with all cultures and parents.

Additionally, she stated it was wise to not take anything personally. In most cases, the parent is not upset or disappointed with the principal as an individual; they just needed a way to express their frustrations.

Struggles faced when dealing with others from varying cultures. As principals were asked about struggles when dealing with others from varying cultures, three common areas emerged; one was that of language. In some cases, there was great frustration on the side of the parent as well as the administrator when a language barrier was involved. The principals all showed compassion and a desire to engage in communication regardless of a language barrier. They felt frustration at not being able to communicate emotions as effectively as they would have liked. In all the cases, if there

100 was time prior to the meeting, the administrator invited someone who could assist in the language to be present aid the interaction.

The other common area of struggle was the desire to fix a situation when the principal did not have the control to do so. Many of these situations dealt with socio- economic situations. While the school can offer services, contacts for parents, and often offer limited clothing and food, the ultimate solution usually does not lie in the hands of a school principal.

Principals also expressed some frustration with staff members not being tolerant and patient with those of other cultures. Most often, teacher-parent misunderstandings had to be dealt with from an administrative position. The principals felt some teachers were often not willing to develop a cultural understanding of the students and families and, thus did not develop a positive multicultural relationship. As was mentioned earlier in the study, the struggle with staff members and their lack of positive relationships with parents is supported by Triandis (2006) who stated, “Learning to put oneself in the shoes of other cultures can develop a healthy criticism of the norms of one’s own culture the way a so-called native sees it” (p. 22). The principals selected for the study were able to suspend their judgment and put themselves in a situation within the different represented culture. It is further evidence that the highly effective principal is aware of their cultural intelligence and uses it to improve interactions and relationships.

Planning prior to interactions with others. Given the interviewed principals’ reflections regarding the prior questions, one would anticipate that much planning occurs

101 prior to interactions with those from other cultures. In reality, the only planning mentioned from all principals was that of language. If there was a need to have another individual from that culture present to contribute to the interpretation of the conversation, prior planning occurred. In one case, Principal E mentioned he had a deaf and mute parent on campus. Planning was always done prior to the meeting with the parents to ensure appropriate communication could be facilitated.

The additional planning that occurred prior to a meeting with a parent from another culture was something that took place around meetings between parents of all cultures. The principal would review the student profile to determine the following: Who was living in the home? Did the student live with both parents or share time in two households. Had anything unusual happened in the life of the student prior to the situation being discussed? The planning sessions were no different among cultures; it was simply the way the principal prepared for all parent meetings.

The principals interviewed all felt they wanted to be attentive, polite, and respectful to the parents with whom they met. This supports the research done by Harry

Triandis (2006) who wrote, “Some attributes are especially important to achieve cultural intelligence. Perhaps the most important is the habit to suspend judgment, until enough information becomes available.”

Reflections following interactions. Reflecting on conversations and encounters with parents and teachers was a key behavioral element of the five principals interviewed.

Principal D mentioned the reflection process continues long after the encounter with

102 parents and students. Often on the drive home or during meeting times with others, the principals shared they always continued to reflect on what went well and what could have improved the encounter. It was also a common theme that each encounter with someone from another culture builds a foundation of understanding and that knowledge is used in future encounters. Most principals agreed that meetings and encounters are most importantly done face-to-face, especially when a difference in culture is involved. Just to see a friendly face and the facial expression along with body language clarified the conversation often during message delivery.

In accordance with valuing cultures, the principals all had various ways in which they recognized students around campus, thus making them feel important. Names were read over the intercom during announcements to celebrate birthdays. Being visible on campus and knowing the students’ names were also common traits among all five principals interviewed. They prided themselves with knowing at least 75% of the students on campus. All five principals interviewed illustrated the skill of interacting sensitively and respectfully, which, according to Robertson (2007), supports that not only are they effective principals, but they do recognize their heightened level of cultural intelligence and used it to improve interactions with others.

Techniques and strategies used to assist others to become more culturally intelligent. Several common actions were shared by the principals when asked how they helped others become more culturally intelligent. The answers ranged from professional

103 development to one-on-one conversations with teachers and staff, to constant modeling behavior with a focus on positive interactions.

Formal training and staff development was provided for all schools through district offerings. Many of the training sessions were followed up at the school sites with additional discussion and training in staff meetings and with professional development sessions held at the sites. Additionally, principals and the district provided literature and articles about being culturally aware and how to interact appropriately with others from varying cultures. There had been a lengthy training on Glen Singleton’s (2006) book

Courageous Conversations, which addressed the achievement gap and the lack of performance and progress being made by students of under-represented cultures.

Principal C stated, “I want to share current articles and literature so that my staff understands that cultural sensitivity is a topic being discussed in other places, not just our school.” Effective principal leaders display a motivation to understand others and to assist others in becoming more understanding.

The words “modeling behavior” came up several times during the interviews with principals. It was thought to be the most effective way to make an impact on staff, students, and even parents. The five principals model positive interactions and sensitive understanding of all students but particularly of those who are in the minority on campus.

It is through observing the understanding and patient behavior the principals exhibit that others have a model to follow. Principal D stated,

Being a positive role model for students, parents, and teachers is the best thing I can do with my time. I am always out before and after school as well as during

104

lunch and recess. My actions and reactions to others is a lesson that is ongoing. I don’t want any student to feel they are not a part of the school and not accepted for who they are and the culture they represent. It is all about respect.

The principals interviewed all had an awareness of their cultural intelligence and used it to improve relationships and model behaviors they wanted to see in others.

Perceptions of peer’s cultural intelligence in comparison to principal’s. When comparing their cultural intelligence to that of their peers, the principals all believed they learned from their peers during every encounter, meeting, and interaction. The principals believed that because the district was so diverse, each school principal could share and speak to the cultural understanding of others. The study principals often talk about building relationships, sharing their time with others, and helping others to become more comfortable within the school setting.

Crowne (2008) discussed the importance of intercultural contact for development of cultural intelligence. She believes the more contact one has with other cultures, the more culturally intelligent that individual will become. With the exception of one principal interviewed, the principals selected had not lived or traveled extensively. The interactions and encounters from which they had to draw were those at the various schools within the district studied. Yet, each of them portrayed a high level of cultural intelligence in their decision-making skills and relationships with the multicultural populations at the school sites. Their awareness of cultural intelligence and their motivation played a large part in the relationships they built on campus. Each of the principals in the case studies mentioned the value they placed on each student at their

105 school site. Far beyond just knowing the names of the students, the principals had taken a real interest in knowing the families and the academic successes and struggles of the students and made sincere efforts to build relationships with all students at the site. The principals involved used their cultural intelligence and awareness to improve their interactions with others.

The final question of the interview dealt with the principals’ overall perception of their success as a principal as it relates to their cultural intelligence level. Each of the principals interviewed said they always tried to put themselves in the shoes of the individuals with whom they are interacting. Principal D honestly spoke about often feeling anxious prior to a meeting with someone when he knew the topic of conversation was not a positive one. He makes a concentrated effort to listen and understand the situation and problems brought to the table during such conversations. All the principals spoke of their eagerness to develop good relationships with parents, teachers, and students from all cultures. Another common theme among principals was valuing all students and recognizing them for the cultural diversity they brought to the school environment. All the aforementioned aspects were part of what the five principals felt had contributed to their success as a principal.

Research Question 3 How do highly effective principals exhibit observable behaviors in their interactions with parents, students, and teachers, demonstrate high levels of cultural intelligence?

Actions and interactions. The communication style and techniques used by the individual principals were recorded during the observation session of the study. The

106 observations included the type of communication style and techniques the principal used while interacting with people from different cultures. Facial expressions and body language are key when observing reactions of individuals engaged in an exchange. A record of observation encounters was kept during the observation process. A tally of the number of interactions the principal had with Caucasians, Hispanic Americans, African

Americans, and Asian Americans was recorded. Graphs indicating the number interactions with those of varying cultures compared to those who were Caucasian were created for each principal.

The significance of the recorded interactions is that, through observation, it was clear the participants had multiple interactions with students of all ethnic groups represented on the campus. In fact, most made a concerted effort to interact with all students who came into their possible contact area. The number of Caucasian interactions at each school was either in line with the percentage of that population at the school site or slightly below the percentage of Caucasians at the school site. The interactions are another example of the high level of cultural intelligence that can be observed in the principal’s daily experiences and help answer Research Question 3 about how highly effective principals’ cultural intelligence can be observed through their daily activities.

In continuing with the observations, several patterns emerged among the five principals. The five principals showed a common thread when it came to four specific areas of interaction between students and principals. All five principals greeted students

107 with a pleasant smile and either a handshake, knuckle bump, or hand wave. Students were addressed by their names in almost each incidence by all principals. When smaller children were being addressed, the principal changed posture so the child could look into the eyes of him/her. During one incident, the principal invited the student to sit in a chair beside him so they could converse face-to-face. At no time was there an occasion in which the principal appeared to dominate over the students.

When the students, teachers, and parents approached the principal, there was always a friendly exchange of words and a smile. In numerous occasions, the principal asked a personal question to follow up on some situation, some bit of information, or some activity in which the student, teacher, or parent had recently been engaged. The posture and facial expressions of all principals left each parent, teacher, and student with a smile as well. During the entire observation, the principal was communicating with those on the campus. The communicative interactions took place in both informal and formal fashions. Often the principal could be heard giving positive comments and encouragement to students, teachers, and parents regarding what they were doing. Often the affirmative words were offered to those with whom the principal had interacted in an earlier situation. In summary, the fact the effective principals had a mindfulness of the knowledge of culture and how culture affects the behavior of an individual impacted the interactions principals had with all students, teachers, and parents represented on campus.

The behaviors of the principals in their interactions were evidence they were not only

108 highly effective in their communication skills but in their behaviors as they relate to interactions with others.

The effective principal, who is a great communicator with students, teachers, and parents, has tens of thousands of interactions with those who pass through his life each year. Many of the interactions are heartwarming and memorable, others are filled with tension and uncertainty, but effective principals, according to McEwan (2009), survive and thrive on this whirlwind of words by keeping it simple. They know that above all else, they must attend, listen, seek to understand, empathize, and make connections, for

“communication seems to work best when it is so direct and so simple that it has a sort of elegance” (Kotter & Rathgeber, 2005). Each of the five principals studied were outstanding at their communication during the interactions with those who made up the fabric of the campus. Figures 13-17 represent the interactions between each principal and those who were Caucasian versus those who were non-Caucasian. Since it was difficult to make accurate ethnic identifications of students based on their outward appearances, the graph simply designates the two observed areas.

109

Figure 13 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal A

3%

Caucasian Non-caucasian

97%

Figure 14 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal B

7%

Caucasian Non-caucasian

93%

110

Figure 15 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal C

20%

Caucasian Non-caucasian

80%

Figure 16 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal D

10%

Caucasian Non-caucasian

90%

111

Figure 17 Interactions with Varying Cultural Populations by Principal E

5%

Caucasian Non-caucasian

95%

Environment. The school environments were observed and similar patterns of cultural intelligence emerged within each. Each school had numerous past awards and pictures depicting pride in their history. There were pictures of students, parents, and teachers engaged in learning and fun activities. In each school office, there was evidence that pride was a big part of the school in the displays of past events and people who had attended at the site. Students, teachers, and parents showed evidence they were proud of the school and its past accomplishments.

Cultural awareness. In each classroom, there was evidence that honoring the cultures of others was of importance. Principal C had a bulletin board where the heritage of each student in the class had been pointed out on a world map. The student’s picture and name were displayed near the country of origin. In another school, parents were sharing traditional foods in the class while the students read a story about a young

112 student’s first day in a new country. In all the five selected schools, there was evidence that cultural awareness was talked about and celebrated with enthusiasm and pride. A principal would be more likely to institute these as daily occurrences at a school site if he/she was culturally intelligent.

Character building programs. In each of the selected schools, character building programs were evident. Principal A proudly pointed out the school had won a national award three years in a row for the character program at the school site. Four of the five schools actively had a pillar of character celebrated each week. Additionally, students were chosen and recognized for their performance in the character program. Principal B spoke of the rules for behavior and outstanding citizenship awards given to the students.

Each of the five schools had put significant thought and care into the character building programs in the schools. Each had a strand of celebrating diversity woven into the building of the character program.

Friendly and inviting atmosphere. The five selected principals all approached their audiences with a smile and a friendly gesture. Even during the moments in which they had issues of discipline to deal with, it was done in a friendly, sensitive, and thoughtful way. Students, parents, and teachers responded in a like manner. Each of the five campuses reflected an atmosphere that was friendly, inviting, and embracing of all cultures and all individuals. Each of the five schools and principals echoed warm, sincere greetings and friendly tones of acceptance for all involved at the site.

113

Summary

Chapter 4 presented the analysis of the inventory data for all principals in the quantitative study. Additionally, it presented the analysis of the interview data and analysis of the behavioral observation data. The quantitative study shows the large group of 34 principals scored markedly higher than the mean score of 3.5. The selected five principals from the larger group scored even higher than the 34-member group. In this particular school district, according to the quantitative measurement tool, the principals are functioning more successfully in culturally diverse situations than those who scored

3.5 or lower in other studies across the country.

The data gathered from Interview Question 1, dealing with the understanding selected principals had regarding cultural intelligence, indicate the selected principals have similar definitions and understandings of the meaning of cultural intelligence. The selected principals’ understanding of the term supports that they have an accurate and correct knowledge of cultural intelligence and what a culturally intelligent principal should be demonstrating on a school campus.

The selected group of five principals scored highest overall in the area of behavioral cultural intelligence. As a group they most often altered facial expressions and changed their body language during cultural interactions. In addition, they all agreed that they often changed their verbal behavior depending on the cultural situation in which they were involved. The larger group of 34 principals scored highest in the area of motivation. As a group they most enjoyed the interactions and opportunities to engage

114 with those of other cultures. Both groups also enjoyed the opportunity to socialize with unfamiliar cultures and learn more about their customs.

The cognitive cultural intelligence reflected the lowest score on the culturally intelligence inventory. While the score was above average for the selected five principals, it was lower in the areas of knowing the rules and vocabulary of other cultures as well as the legal and economic systems of various cultures. Unless an individual has lived in the country or studied a specific economic system of another culture, they would not necessarily have this knowledge. All principals involved in the inventory relied heavily on their experiential day-to-day interactions with the various cultures of people represented at the school site. It is through these experiences they gained an immense amount of knowledge and understanding about the groups of people with whom they interacted. The data supports a high level of cultural intelligence among the principals working within this school district.

Knowing the participating principals had all been trained in culturally relevant educational techniques and had knowledge regarding a CRT approach to education, it can be surmised that this training along with several other culturally focused professional development sessions offered to the principals has added to their cultural intelligence levels. Additionally, the diversity of the district as a whole lends itself to more exposure to and opportunity with those of various cultures and backgrounds. The principals involved have had the opportunity to experience a wide range of various options for further educational familiarity with diverse groups.

115

The data gathered from one-on-one interviews suggest the chosen principals had similar understandings about Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and African

Americans with regard to their cultural differences and how to interact with the families and children. Further, the selected principals all spoke to their use of observation of cultural practices and reactions of others from similar cultures prior to implementing those practices in their everyday supervision of the school. The data support the fact the selected principals recognize their own cultural intelligence when interacting with those from other cultures.

The data also illustrated the fact the select principals all used reflection in their daily interactions and reactions to situations. It is through this reflective lens the select principals were able to improve upon their relationships with parents, teachers, and students from other cultures. The principals involved in the study, while they did not do pre-meditated rehearsals prior to meetings with parents, did make adjustments in their schedule and seek out help when needed for language issues and support through a person from the culture the parent represented. The principals were aware of the knowledge they had gleaned from working with other cultures and used that prior knowledge in preparing for future meetings.

Principals were found to actively help others become more culturally intelligent.

In many instances they gave thought and preparation to the further staff development and personal training of teachers, students, and parents with regard to cultural intelligence.

The most emphasis was put on the modeling of culturally sensitive actions and

116 interactions for others. It is through this modeling the climate of the school was set and followed by others who became a part of the school community. The selected principals made a concerted effort to help others understand various cultures and actively attempted to educate others regarding those differences between cultures.

The data did not support the fact that the selected principals saw themselves as having heightened levels of cultural intelligence. In fact, all the interviewed principals felt they had much to learn from their colleagues. Each felt humble when speaking of their personal strengths and accolades as highly effective principals.

The data from the observation of principals as they conducted school business was supportive of their high cultural intelligence levels. The observed behaviors suggest the principals have multiple interactions with multiple cultures. The behaviors were observable and support the hypothesis that the effective principal has a high level of observable multicultural interactions with parents, students, and teachers. The multiple levels of data collection provided data answering all three research questions.

117

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overview of the Study

Within the next 10 years, California’s population is estimated to grow by 6 million. The majority of those 6 million new residents will belong to a race other than

Caucasian. About 40% of all Californians now speak a language other than English, and more than 250 different languages are spoken throughout the state. Nearly one-fifth of

America’s school-aged children speak a language other than English at home.

By 2015, the California’s Caucasian population is expected to shrink by 13%. At the same time, the Hispanic population is projected to rise by 8%, and the Asian population is expected to increase by 2%. Caucasians will soon cease to be a majority, becoming the largest minority group amongst many. In 2005, almost one-third of all the new immigrants to the United States established residency in California. Nine million of

California’s 37 million residents were born outside the United States.

As the numbers illustrate, California has become the destination of preference for immigrants. Two of the state’s fastest growing populations are Hispanic and Asian, although persons from around the world also move here for the promises of the Golden

State. California is attractive to these populations because of job availability, social programs, and the knowledge that it is already a host to large similar ethnic communities throughout its length. Clearly, the old ways will not be enough. To educate these diverse

118 populations of students, we must alter some of the practices we currently deem effective in education, as well as other philosophies, to match our emerging reality.

As educators look at California state testing results over the past 10 years, it is clear students are struggling to make progress. Notably, the Hispanic and Latino students have had a slight increase from 2009 to 2011 to the point that they surpassed the increases made by Black or African American students. Yet, the gap between the scores of White students and students of color remains wide.

This study examined the cultural intelligence of a group of principals within one school district in northern California. Additionally, this mixed methods study examined the relationships between a selected number of effective principals and their levels of cultural intelligence. The study tested whether a direct relationship existed between cultural intelligence and those principals deemed successful leaders in the school district.

The researcher was particularly interested in the experiences and strategies principal leaders used to navigate and how those strategies related to the cultural intelligence score of those leaders selected. Findings suggest a principal’s level of cultural intelligence may increase the effectiveness of the leader’s abilities to relate to students, teachers, and community and to develop an atmosphere where those of diverse cultures and backgrounds want to not only be but want to perform as a part of the school community.

Although recent research (Alon & Higgins, 2005; Gabel, Dolan, & Cedin, 2005) focused on the relationship between (a) emotional intelligence and transformational

119 leadership and (b) emotional intelligence and culture, no empirical research has been found to focus on the relationship between cultural intelligence within the context of school leadership. Given that limited research has been conducted on effective school principal leaders and their levels of cultural intelligence, there is a need to better understand what qualities makes an effective school principals. This study used a phenomenological qualitative research approach as well as a quantitative inventory to contribute toward filling this gap in the literature. To understand the essence or basic underlying structure of the meaning of cultural intelligence and its impact on leadership, included in the study were one-on-one in-depth interviews and a lengthy observation of the selected principals.

Grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1997) was used as the method of data analysis. This study used the coding family introduced by Bogdan and Biklen (007) as a starting point to code the data, and from there original themes were generated. The five participants randomly selected for this study from a total of 12 deemed effective in their roles as effective principal leaders, shared their personal stories of background, travels, understanding of individuals from different cultures, struggles, and what planning they did prior to interacting with individuals from other cultures. These findings along with a lengthy observation revealed important information about how participants negotiated the challenges, dilemmas, reflections, and successes of their roles as administrative principal leaders.

120

Chapter 5 provides an interpretation of the findings bound by the evidence collected to address the research questions in this study. In this chapter, the themes presented in Chapter 4 are discussed by referencing the importance of each theme. This section also evaluates the findings relative to the existing literature presented in Chapter

2. Next, the chapter provides recommendations for action using the primary learning objectives consisting of: (1) developing an understanding of transformational leadership and its impacts, (2) the application of research to policy and practice, and (3) the use of data to drive decision making. The chapter ends with recommendations for further study and a reflection and conclusion from the researcher.

The sample was comprised of 39 elementary principals. Twelve of those principals were deemed particularly effective according to the associate superintendent who used a set of criteria to place them apart from the larger group. From the 12 principals deemed especially effective, five were randomly selected for a more in-depth case study. The Cultural Intelligence Survey (CQS) instrument was used to obtain quantitative data about perceptions of cultural intelligence for all 39 principals.

Additionally, one-on-one interviews and observations were conducted with the principals representing the five case studies to provide qualitative explanations of complex phenomena within the context of the active position of the principal.

The study results were obtained by selecting a quantitative descriptive correlation from a cultural intelligence inventory methodology and a qualitative methodology using one-on-one interviews and observations. The methods used to generate results was

121 appropriate because the intention was to explore the relationship between the principals’ measured cultural intelligence and their use of cultural intelligence as they went about their business of leading schools.

The design used theme-related statements with a Likert-type scale for tabulating participants’ responses. The use of theme-related statements was practical and offered all individuals the opportunity to use the response options provided. The survey instrument used was to determine the level of cultural intelligence of elementary principal leaders within the selected district. The one-on-one interview gave individuals the opportunity to reflect and respond to their perceptions of their leadership as it related to students, teachers, and the community. Finally, the observation gave the researcher the opportunity to record the actions and reactions of principals as they went about their normal school day interacting and responding to situations and individuals on the campus.

Three research questions were formulated for the study:

1. How do highly effective principals demonstrate high levels of cultural

intelligence?

2. How do highly effective principals recognize their own cultural intelligence

and consciously use this to improve their interactions?

3. How do highly effective principals exhibit observable behaviors in their

interactions with parents, students, and teachers, thus demonstrating high

levels of cultural intelligence?

122

The findings of this study supported earlier research demonstrating that effective leaders consider both individual and situational factors when making decisions where cultural differences are evident. This study differed from previous empirical research on the application of cultural intelligence in that prior studies were primarily related to business organizations and not educational settings.

Theory of Cultural Intelligence

In reviewing the research, a tremendous amount of literature has been written about cognitive psychology and intelligence theory development. Additionally, the research and studies build on one another and create a solid foundation of understanding intelligence. Themes emerged relating to the importance of different definitions of intelligence and the importance of multiple intelligences. Cultural anthropology is another well studied concept. From this study, related themes emerged around the need for accepting people of diverse backgrounds and definitively defining the term “culture.”

The concept of cultural intelligence has been investigated more in the area of global organizations and expatriates. According to the study of June Schmieder and Doland

Cairns’s (1996) Ten Skills of Highly Effective Principals, “Effective leadership is a function of a leader’s style, personality, skill, and ability to articulate a vision acceptable to followers in a particular political situation” (p. 49). Where cultural intelligence plays an immense role is in articulating the vision acceptable to the diverse population of

123 followers and bringing them into the fold of the educational goal of success. The ability to communicate is an attribute all successful principals must possess.

Participants found that by embracing the diverse communities of parents, students, and teachers and respecting what they brought to the school site, it was much easier to bring them into the fold of accepting the vision of the school and the plan for success they wished to implement for each student. It was discovered that their desire to not only possess cultural intelligence but to reflect on their behaviors, interactions, and reactions of encounters attributed to their success as principals. The participants in this study attributed their success to the district’s vision to know each and every student by name and where that student was performing academically. Additionally, they attributed success to their willingness to learn techniques and strategic ways of working with families from cultures unlike theirs. Furthermore, participants were influenced by their colleagues who enriched their practice through dialogue and a transmission of resources.

The Department of Elementary Education had arranged, designed, and delivered

“strategic educational opportunities” for principals to ensure they had opportunities to learn about working with those of diverse cultures.

Interpretation of the Findings

The results of the research study demonstrated a significant positive relationship between cultural intelligence and successful leadership in elementary school leaders of diverse schools. Additionally, results suggest individuals with high cultural intelligence

124 are able to lead and manage more effectively in multicultural environments. These findings are consistent with Ang and Inkpen (2008), who ascertained that cultural intelligence is important to effective leadership in multicultural environments. Deng and

Gibson (2009) corroborated this conclusion in their qualitative study of 32 western expatriate managers and 19 local managers in China. The interviews provided evidence that cultural intelligence is a key cross-cultural leadership competency for effective leadership.

Working with children and their families from culturally/linguistically diverse backgrounds requires educators and speech-language pathologists develop their own cultural competence or cultural intelligence. Immigrants are entering the United States from more and more diverse countries. Speech-language pathologists, other support staff and educators are less familiar with languages and cultures of persons from such countries. Interacting effectively with these diverse populations requires Cultural

Intelligence (CQ). There are three components of CQ: the head, or cognitive; the body, or physical; and the heart, or emotional/motivational (Earley & Mosakowski, 2004).

Results of the study lead the researcher to conclude that selected principals were actively displaying evidence that the three components were a part of their leadership skills at the school site.

When individual cultural intelligence factors were examined, behavioral cultural intelligence and motivational intelligence were found to be principals’ strengths, based on the cultural intelligence inventory. Evidence from the inventory indicated the principals

125 enjoyed the opportunities to socialize with those from unfamiliar cultures. An even higher score was for enjoying the interactions with those of other cultures. All five of the principals scored far above the mean score in these two areas.

With regard to the remaining 34 principals of the district who took the cultural intelligence inventory, while they did not score as high as the selected five, all scored above the median score in both behavior and motivation. There was evidence that while they enjoyed socializing and interacting with other cultures, the score was not as significant as that of the five chosen principal cases.

A relative weakness with principals was indicated by the results of the inventory in the area of cognitive intelligence. All 39 principals scored lower in this area. While the selected five principals scored lower in knowing legal, economic systems, rules, and vocabulary of other cultures, their score was comparatively higher than the remaining 34 principals in the study. Knowing the verbal and non-verbal rules of other cultures proved to be a weakness with all principals.

The lower score in the cognitive intelligence area could be attributed to the fact that all but one of the five selected principals spoke only English. Further, only one of the five principals had lived and traveled extensively outside the United States. The research supports the fact that experiential knowledge is most effective in improving cultural intelligence. Considering most of the principals involved in the study spoke only

English and had not lived outside the United States or traveled extensively, their interactions and experiences with other cultures was significantly limited.

126

The area of behavioral cultural intelligence reflected that the five principals were acutely aware of their actions as they conversed with those students, community members, and staff of other cultures. The actions and interactions were improved because they recognized and applied the knowledge of cultural intelligence.

Awareness of Culturally Diverse Needs

Cultural intelligence in the motivational and emotional knowledge areas with regard to leading culturally diverse populations was the highest scoring area on the inventory. The five selected principals all expressed strong motivation to both understand and ensure a comfortable, welcoming environment for all families at the school site. It was through the motivational and emotional areas that the level of cultural intelligence improved the interactions. As a whole, through the understanding of cultural needs as well as being able to model and instruct those with less cultural intelligence, the five selected principals stood out as exceptional leaders of the schools. The research concluded the principals studied had an awareness of cultural intelligence in themselves that led to an awareness and recognition of the levels of cultural intelligence in others. It was this recognition that improved their interactions as a whole and gave them the ability to instruct and model for those who were less aware.

Modeling Techniques

The selected principals were aware of the need to model culturally intelligent intervention strategies for the staff and students. They were aware of the need to demonstrate culturally intelligent strategies to improve various situations at the school

127 site. They purposefully disseminated research related to cultural intelligence and positive interactions with those from varying cultures. Students appeared aware of the appropriate manner in which to interact and communicate with others during their school day.

Pride for School Culture

The five schools studied had welcoming and inclusionary environments. The staff and administration were welcoming and inviting when dealing with those of varying cultures. The principals of the five schools spoke of setting the example for a welcoming environment more than once. Through the modeling of these behaviors, the culture of each school clearly depicted a welcoming atmosphere. Conversations were initiated about family and events, and in each case, parents were encouraged to share and have active conversation in a hospitable way.

Throughout the school, banners and plaques depicted the successes of students and the school in general. The pride of the school was evident in the cleanliness, the artifacts displayed, and the manner in which the school was organized and supervised.

Principals were prideful that their schools were pleasant and welcoming places for all students to learn and grow. The sense of value and worthiness was evident by the pictures on the walls and the traditions and customs of the past memorialized as artifacts of importance.

128

Positive Character Building Programs

Each school had a program related to character building. In each of the schools, there was evidence of the importance of being a good person and a friend to others. The focus for outstanding character was begun during the morning school announcements and carried throughout the day at recesses, lunch, and in the final hour when the students lined up to leave in the afternoon. In each situation, there was an emphasis on the behavior and character of each person as human beings living together at one school as one family.

Reflection and Self-analysis of Situations

The principals studied all expressed the need to deal with each interaction on a case-by-case situation. The all interactions were flexible regarding the leader’s behavior and depicted an awareness of understanding conversational tone, expectations of the final outcomes, and the body language cues visible during conversation. In four of the five cases, the principals expressed that the reflection and self-analysis of the experiences with other cultures impacted their knowledge of that culture as well as how to improve their behavior during future interactions. Research indicated that responding to the cues and needs of the individuals of varying cultures was indicative of the principals’ level of cultural intelligence. In each case, the principals expressed they would use this knowledge of past experience to improve interactions.

129

Valued Relationships

The principals studied held developing relationships with those from other cultures in high regard. In each case, they perceived relationships as a perceived success in cultural intelligence level. Each principal expressed their enjoyment of interacting with the various cultures represented at the school site. Their exposure to the culture, food, customs, and relationships contributed to the principals’ higher level of cultural intelligence. In each of the five schools, opportunities were created for the sharing of the culture and customs of the various students represented at the school site.

Communication was Valued

Communication was of high importance on each campus. Not only did the principals initiate the conversation, they had multiple interactions with the many ethnic subgroups represented at the school site. The number of interactions with the various subgroups represented at the site was closely related to the demographic population of the school. In each case of communication, there was purposeful and meaningful attention to the topic at hand. All were treated the same and on equal terms without attention to the ethnicity of the individuals.

Limitations

This study had several limitations that might have influenced its results. First, the population of this study presented several characteristics. It was not homogeneous when we compare it to the number of possible cases it could have included from different

130 countries or states within the United States. California is unusual in that it is a diverse state and the specific school district selected was greatly diverse in the ethnicities represented. There are not other cases with which to compare. Although the sample was adequate, if it were larger, it would demonstrate greater reliability for generalization of findings.

Another limitation is that the sample came from the same school district. This might produce some variance in the results related to cultural intelligence because principals from this district usually have abundant opportunities for interacting with those of various cultures. Furthermore, the fact that the majority of the principals had little to no experience with living and working outside the United States was limiting to their intercultural experiences.

Contributions and Transformational Leadership

Study findings show a positive correlation among successful principal leadership and emotional and cultural intelligence skills. Results of this study can serve as an underpinning theory to foster the development of a more systematic approach for training principal leaders that incorporates cultural and emotional competencies needed to function and flourish in an increasingly diverse student environment. Learnings from this study can be used to introduce positive social change in diverse school districts with the schools incorporating training for the staff, including the development of emotional and cultural intelligence skills. With the advent of this type of training, principal leaders and

131 teacher leaders could have more success with students, thus contributing to our global society of the 21st century. The development of more culturally and emotionally intelligent school leaders will help create a new generation of leaders who can maximize the learning experience for students of diverse backgrounds; leaders who can understand people’s emotions and cultural backgrounds while leading effectively. Creating the conditions to support the need for more culturally intelligent and effective principal leaders will require a strong conviction in the moral righteousness of addressing the problem of achievement gap between White students and students of color. It will require a conviction that becomes more complicated because of the diverse beliefs, needs, interests, and values of all stakeholders.

Transformational leadership has the potential to change the very culture of the institution by helping it adapt to environmental changes (Eyal & Kark, 2004). Burns

(1978) and Bass (1985) view transformational leadership as higher order change in that followers are encouraged to take on more responsibility while contributing to organizational change and innovation. According to Friedman (2005), transactional leadership is stability oriented whereas transformational leadership is innovative- oriented.

Recommendation: Create a systemic plan for administrative training around cultural intelligence and strategies for effective principal leadership.

It is this innovative type of transformational leadership that will contribute to the continued educational growth of principal leaders by offering opportunities for further ethnic and diversity training to assist with the communities they serve at the school site.

132

Professional development around cultural intelligence and successful principal practices will invest in leadership skills of current and future administrative leadership.

Recommendations for practice include the development of training and education modules that include the development of leadership skills with an emphasis on cultural intelligence skills as validated by this study. Professional development for administrators should incorporate a course focused on leadership development within the context of cultural intelligence and its impact on student, community, and staff successes. Diversity training of customs, practices, and religious needs impacting schoolaged children would also be of value to principal leaders.

Educational Policy and Practice

California’s population is diverse and growing more so each year. The K-12 public school system has not been able to adapt to the new and increasing needs of the students and families. Policy plays a role in the functions of the K-12 educational system. The revenue sources for schools have continued to decline as the economy has met many challenges in the state. In California, the revenue system is highly dependent upon personal income taxes, corporate taxes, and sales and use taxes. In good years, the state has more money to fund education. In lean years, education suffers the decline of revenue. California, compared to the rest of the nation, relies less on stable revenue sources such as property taxes due to the limitations from Proposition 13 (California

133

Budget, PPIC, 2011). A change in educational policy must come with a strong degree of support from federal, state, and local governing agencies.

Recommendation: Alignment of K-12 education with that of higher education

The alignment of K-12 education with higher educational institutions in determining the prerequisites students are lacking as they complete K-12 education would assist educators to better prepare students who have continued to not perform adequately in K-12 institutions to meet CSU and UC requirements (see Figure 18). As indicated by the data in Figure 18, students from the African-American and Latino cultures are meeting the requirements for higher education at only 23% compared to 40% for Whites and 59% for Asians which is a dismal percentage within itself. Furthermore, students who are deemed “Ready for College” on the California Early Assessment

Program (EAP), English and Mathematics Exams, show even greater disparities (see

Figure 19).

134

Figure 18 High School Graduation Rates by Ethnicity, 2007-08

59% 34% 40% 23% 23%

135

Figure 19 Percentage of Students Deemed “Ready for College” by Ethnicity

25 16 13 32 32 15 8 7 4 4

The statistics in Figure 19 show that only 4% of African American students are prepared for college Mathematics and only 8% are prepared for English instruction on the college level. The Latino and African American populations have very similar declines of percentages with 3% and 4%, respectively. These numbers compared to the White and

Asian populations show an alarming disproportionality in preparing diverse students for a promising future. Further, it gives conclusive evidence that the K-12 educational system and the higher educational systems of California need to work with policymakers and

136 stakeholders who are involved in the decision making for adequately preparing students for the future.

The second portion of the alignment regarding K-12 and higher educational institutions is in relation to the preparation of school leaders. Potential school administrators completing degrees of higher education in the field of administration would be better prepared to meet the challenging needs of culturally diverse school communities by being introduced to cultural intelligence and effective leadership skills of school leaders. The evidence gleaned from this study offers strong evidence that during the early training of potential educators and administrators, there is a strong need for more cultural diversity training and curriculum that would address the needs of those who will be serving diverse communities.

Data-driven Decision Making

Data-driven decision making (DDDM) refers to a systematic way of collecting and analyzing data to guide a range of decisions to help improve the success of students and schools (Burke, 2007). Through a process of analysis and summarization, schools can convert information into actionable knowledge by suing judgment to prioritize information and weighting the relative merit of possible solutions (Halverson, Grigg,

Pritchett, & Thomas, 2007). This knowledge can be used to support different types of decisions and maximize resources that might include updated diversity training academies and establishing mentoring programs as recommended in this final section.

137

Recommendation: Develop academic training modules for diversity guidance for new and aspiring administrators

Recommendations for practice include the development of training and education modules that include the development of leadership skills with an emphasis on cultural intelligence skills as validated by this study. Research implies administrators learn about cultures by experiential training at the school site. This knowledge could be enhanced by various opportunities provided by higher educational institutions and school districts.

Once a theoretical base of knowledge is provided to administrators a second phase of training would be implemented. Programs where administrators are given the opportunity to experience field trips to other diverse schools and shadow successful, culturally intelligent principals for one week would be beneficial. They could visualize the behavioral intelligence skills of successful principals who deal with diverse communities on a daily basis.

Professional Development for administrators should incorporate a course focused on leadership development within the context of cultural intelligence and its impact on student, community, and staff successes. Administrators could learn more about their cultural intelligence and how they can better communicate the educational needs of the school, how it will impact the families involved, and what the families can do to assist with the success of the student. Creating and implementing a Community Cultural

Academy would afford the school district a forum to develop mutual respect and trust before irreparable damage is done in building the relationships with the families involved.

138

Implications of the Study

As educators look at the California State Testing results over the past six years, it is clear students are struggling to make progress. The results over time show all students are demonstrating an increase in test scores. Notably, test scores of Hispanic and Latino students increased from 2009 to 2011 to the point that they surpassed the increases made by Black or African American students. This may be a result of increased attention placed on the performance of English language learners. Yet the gap between the scores of White students and students of color remains wide. A school’s performance is measured heavily by students’ performance on both English/language arts and math assessments. Figures 20 and 21 represent the percentage of students scoring proficient or advanced on the California Standards tests from 2006 to 2011.

Figure 20 English/Language Arts CST

85

75 Asian 65

55 White

45 Statewide

35 % Scoring Scoring Proficient % Advanced or 25 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

(California Department of Education, 2011)

139

Figure 21 Math CST

Asian

85

75 White 65

55 Statewide

45 Hispanic or 35 Latino

% Scoring Scoring Proficient % Advanced or 25 Black or African 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 American

(California Department of Education, 2011)

Figure 21 demonstrates that the number of students scoring proficient or advanced on the California CST math assessment is increasing. However, scores of White students leveled slightly from 2010 to 2011 and the scores of Hispanic or Latino students increased slightly more than other groups from 2010 to 2011. Yet the disparity between ethnic subgroups remains relatively constant. The above information supports a need to better prepare, train, and consider the principal leaders who have an intelligence factor for effective leadership of diverse communities.

As globalization increases and the world becomes smaller, we need to develop new leadership skills and abilities that might not have been considered before. Results of this study suggest it is possible to develop leaders having the needed skills to succeed.

The development of future leaders should be based on the development of leaders with emotional and cultural intelligences who are able to understand people’s emotions and

140 cultures to lead them effectively. The development of leadership training modules based on this research could help this purpose. This research has made a significant contribution to the leadership field because its findings have shown that cultural intelligences are mostly related and the possession of these skills could help a principal leader be more effective and successful by impacting the lives of diverse children who are currently struggling to make the mark in California schools.

Given the future of California and the ethnic projections (see Figure 22), it is important all principal leaders be aware of cultural differences and have a background of cultural proficiency in order to educate all students to high levels through knowing, valuing, and using students’ cultural backgrounds, languages, and learning styles.

Figure 22 School-aged Children by Race Projection

Number of School Age Children (5-19) Projected in CA by Race 14,000,000 12,000,000

10,000,000

8,000,000

6,000,000 Population 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Other 1,643,331 1,717,794 1,824,577 1,924,915 2,048,858 2,213,130 White 2,868,382 2,644,852 2,525,850 2,611,694 2,486,380 2,436,792 Hispanic 3,295,420 4,119,098 4,512,579 5,474,407 6,270,577 7,036,142

(California Department of Finance, 2011)

141

The Impact of Our Changing Culture

The aforementioned statistics may seem like numbers that are so far into the future we do not have to give it our attention today, but in reality, they represent statistics that will soon challenge every school in California. Each day, California continues to become more racially and ethnically diverse. The changes in California’s diversity will present many challenges and questions for local school districts. The question we must address is are our school leaders equipped to address the challenges associated with educating ethnic and racially diverse communities? How do principals provide leadership and guidance to communities speaking a language other than English? What impact will a principal’s efforts and leadership priorities have on communities with cultures and core values that are unfamiliar to the majority of principal leaders? The fact of the matter is, the face of California is changing. Local school districts must be responsive to the changes if they wish to remain effective and continue to ensure all students are successful and have opportunities in our global society.

One idea might be to begin a response plan providing cultural academies to teach educators about the various cultures represented in their community and school. The cultural academies would fill a need for educational leaders as the communities become more racially and linguistically diverse. This would be only one way to bridge the emerging gap in community expectations.

142

Need for Updated Diversity Programs

As these various cultural groups enter our schools, it is critical we have principals in charge who are culturally sensitive to not only what the students and families bring to the community but to the past experiences that may impact the ways in which they see our educational systems. The task of partnering with these ethnically diverse, limited

English learner communities to deliver educational services is often oversimplified.

Certainly it is more than simply registering a family into the educational system. We must embrace them as human beings, make an effort to understand their cultures, and show a respect and desire to learn more about the rich background and culture they bring.

Communication is often a challenge, if not impossible, as many ethnically diverse groups are linguistically isolated, speaking limited or no English. In limited English proficient communities, the lack of language skills impacts the community members in many ways. Often the student has more English ability than the parent. Parents are hampered in their ability to access fundamental necessities such as employment, police protection, and healthcare. These fundamental necessities impact the performance of school children. The culturally intelligent leader is sensitive to and cognizant of these needs and finds ways within the school community to assist with connections to aid the families’ needs.

Complicating the language barriers, the home culture may also dramatically impact their willingness to seek assistance, or even understand the role and nature of

143 those charged with the education of the children. Programs to mitigate those issues are desperately needed in many areas.

Recommendations for Further Study

Recommendations for practitioners and administrators would include studies conducted in the same fashion in which this study was conducted to determine if the results of this study can be generalized. Another study should include a larger population, maybe from different districts or populations within a university administrative training program using the same number of cases. Another study could consider comparing two populations and looking at the differences between both studies.

This next study should use a revised version of the questionnaire and focus on looking at the relationship between cultural intelligence and transformational leadership, especially within a specific district, region or state.

Conclusion

For the foreseeable future, California’s population will continue to become more diverse in race, ethnicity, culture, and language. School districts throughout the state must be prepared to respond to these changes in demographics to provide effective educational services and critical resources to meet community needs. Failing to acknowledge and prepare for the demographic changes already in motion will result in educational leaders unable to impact the educational needs of students due to their lack of

144 cultural intelligence and skills. Likely there will be schools serving communities that do not understand, value, or respect American educational systems due to their lack of understanding the system and the expectations placed on the students. The cultural intelligence and attributes enveloping the effective leadership skills of principal leaders are likely to make a measurable difference in the success rates for students who are among the most vulnerable and possess the highest need within our educational system.

To be a leader in the global economy, we must address the barriers children of the United

States are facing within our educational system.

145

APPENDICES

146

Appendix A

Cultural Intelligence Survey

147

Appendix B

Consent Forms

Consent Form For Cultural Intelligence Survey

Dear Principal,

You are invited to participate in a research study which will be conducted by Linda Meyerson, Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at California State University, Sacramento. As part of my doctoral studies I hope to learn the impact of cultural intelligence on the effective behaviors and decisions made by principals who work on a daily basis with a diverse student population. The questions are designed to provide perceptions into your awareness and knowledge of the use of cultural intelligence in your day to day activities as a school leader. I am asking for you to participate in a survey which will measure your level of cultural intelligence as it relates to cognitive, behavioral and motivational actions. If you decide to participate, the 20 item four factor CQS (Cultural Intelligence Scale) survey will be administered at a designated meeting. To preserve the confidentiality of all information gathered in this study, you will be issued a pseudonym. A pseudonym will also be used for your school name. It will take approximately 10 minutes to complete the survey. The research survey will be given by a third party following a district principal’s meeting in a designated private room.

Some of the interview questions may raise difficult or troubling issues, but you don’t have to answer any question if you don’t want to and you can stop at any time. If the questions cause any unpleasant memories to resurface, or you become emotionally distraught you can contact the Psychological Counseling Services at your school district.

Although the study may provide insights into the impact of cultural intelligence on the effective principal, it cannot guarantee that you will receive any benefits from the study. If you decide to participate, you are free to withdraw your consent, and to discontinue participation at any time without penalty.

Your responses will be kept confidential. Every measure will be taken to protect the identities of all participants. In reporting data results, names will not be used. The data derived from your answers will be aggregated along with data from other participants. If you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 801-4381. You may also contact Dr. Frank Lilly, my faculty sponsor, at [email protected]. If you agree to participate in this study please sign the consent form below.

______Signature of Participant

148

Consent Form for Interview

Dear Principal,

You are invited to be interviewed and participate in a research study that I am conducting. I am a student in the Educational Leadership & Policy Studies program at the University of California, Sacramento. As part of my doctoral studies I hope to learn the impact of cultural intelligence on the effective behaviors and decisions made by principals who work on a daily basis with a diverse student population. The questions are designed to provide your perceptions into your awareness and knowledge of the use of cultural intelligence. I am asking for you to participate in the study that will consist of the data collection methods outlined below.

If you decide to participate, the questions that will be asked will require about an hour of your time. Your responses will be kept confidential. All research records, video recordings, and consent forms will be stored in a locked file until the completion of the study. The information collected will be destroyed within six (6) months after the study is completed. In addition, the participant’s names will not be used. Participants will be identified only by a number for survey purposes and a pseudonym for focus purposes in any reports or publications that may result from this study.

Your participation in the one-on-one interview will take approximately one hour. The observation period will be approximately 3 hours where data will be collected regarding your decision making processes, effective behaviors and how you choose to use your cultural intelligence in the motivation of others around the school campus. Please be assured regarding the confidentiality and anonymity of any information you choose to share during the interview process.

Although the study may provide insights into the impact of cultural intelligence on the day to day decision making of an effective principal, it cannot guarantee that you will receive any benefits from the study. If you decide to participate, you are free to withdraw your consent, and to discontinue participation at any time without penalty. At any time that you feel uncomfortable you may stop the survey.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 801-4381. You may also contact Dr. Frank Lilly, my faculty sponsor, at [email protected]. If you agree to participate in this study please sign the consent form below. ______Signature of Participant

149

Appendix C

Cultural Intelligence Principal Interview

Demographics

1. Pseudonym Name: ______

2. School pseudonym name ______

3. School address: ______

4. Email address: ______

5. How many years have you been in the field of education? ______

6. How many years have you been in administration? ______

7. How many years have you been a principal? ______

8. Do you speak any other language other than English? ______

9. Which language (s) ______

10. Have you lived outside of California? ______

11. Where? ______

12. Have you lived outside of the United States? ______

13. Where? ______

14. Have you traveled outside of California? ______

15. Where? ______

16. Have you traveled outside of the United States? ______

17. Where? ______

150

Appendix C (continued)

Interview Questions and Interview Probes

Interview Questions Interview Probes

1. Do you speak a second language? A: If yes, which one(s)

(Cognitive)

2. Have you been to another country? A: Which one (s)

B: How long were you there?

(Behavioral)

3. Reflect on the term Cultural A: Separate the terms, talk about culture, Intelligence. What does that term talk about intelligence, how are they mean to you? related?

B: What does the phrase mean as a (Cognitive) whole?

4. Talk to me about your A: What is your understanding about the understanding of individuals from culture of the African American? different cultures? Differences?

What do you know about B: What is your understanding in regards other’s traditions, values and to the culture of Asian Americans? communication styles? Differences?

(Cognitive) C. What is your understanding in regards to the culture of Hispanic Americans? Differences?

D. What is your understanding about other cultures which you serve at the school site? Differences?

151

Appendix C (continued)

5. Talk about struggles you face when A: What communication issues have occurred? dealing with individuals from different cultures? B: What misunderstandings have you encountered in relation to actions or (Behavioral) assumptions?

6. Discuss your planning prior to A: What do you think about before talking or interacting with individuals of other meeting with individuals from other cultures? cultures? B: What do you do during these interactions?

(Motivational)

7. Discuss your thoughts and reflections A: What do you think about? after you have interactions with those of different cultures. B: How do you alter your thoughts or behaviors?

(Motivational)

8. Tell me about the techniques you use to A: Conversations help others become more culturally intelligent? B. Professional development

C: Modeling

(Motivational/Cognitive) D: Student consequences and techniques

9. Describe your perception as to how your A: What is your perception of the difference in level of cultural intelligence differs from the way you handle cultural interactions and the that of your peers? way your peers handle their cultural interactions?

B: Share with me some examples of incidents that you might recall that support your (Motivational/Behavioral) perception.

10. Reflect on how your level of cultural A: With parents intelligence contributes to your success as an effective principal? B: With students

C: With teachers (Meta cognitive) D: With peers

Appendix D

Chart of Observations

Principal Interactions with Parents, Staff and Students Verbalization /Observations as They Relate to Cultural Intelligence of Principals Interview Results: Cognitive Use of other languages Cultural knowledge Thoughts regarding Techniques used: Interactions with: Modeling African American Student consequences Hispanic Help others understand Asian cultural situation

Other

Behavioral (interview) Visitation to Communication with Actions and assumptions Sharing with students other countries others

Motivational Prior planning before Interactions with other (interview) Reflections Altering behavior interaction cultures about interaction Meta-Cognitive Reflection of parent Reflection of student Reflection of teacher Reflection of peer interaction interaction interaction interaction

Observations

152

Appendix D (continued)

Interview Results: Visible Non- Verbally using other Actions depicting Actions with: Setting examples: verbal actions languages cultural knowledge African Americans Students Cognitive Hispanic Directing others regarding Asian culture

Other Behavioral Evidence of knowledge Display of sensitive Actions with or without Student interaction regarding home culture communication relating assumptions African American of individual in contact to culture Hispanic

Asian

Other Motivational Evidence of pre-planned Interaction with others: Body language of recipient Principal changes approach interaction African American African American for more positive outcome

Hispanic Hispanic

Asian Asian

Other Other Meta-Cognitive Interactions with: Peer Interaction around parents Students Classified Staff cultural situations/questions

Teachers Others

153

154

REFERENCES

Aldridge, S. (2003). The facts about social mobility. New Economy, 10(4), 189-193. DOI: 10.1046/j.1468-0041.2003.00315.x

Alon, I., & Higgins, J. M. (2005). Global leadership success through emotional and cultural intelligences. Business Horizons, 48, 501-512.

Ang, S., & Inkpen, A. C. (2008). Cultural intelligence and offshore outsourcing success: A framework of firm-level intercultural capability. Decision Sciences, 39(3), 337- 358. Doi: 10,1111/j.15405915.2008.00195.x

Ang, S., & Van Dyne, L. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of culture intelligence: Theory, measurement, and applications. New York: M. E. Sharpe.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, C. (2006). Personality correlates of the four-factor model of cultural intelligence. Group Organization Management, 31, 100-123. Retrieved from SagePub.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K. Y., Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2007). Cultural intelligence: Its measurements and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3(3), 335-371.

Association for Middle Level Education (AMLE). (2012, January). AMLE research summary: Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.amle.org/Research/ResearchSummaries/Assessment/tabid/2580/Defau lt.aspx

Barth, R. S. (2002). The culture builder. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 6-11.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Benedict, R. (1959). Patterns of culture (8th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Berger, K. S. (2001). The developing person through the life span. New York: Worth Publishers.

Boas, F. (1962). Anthropology and modern life. New York: W. W. Norton.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

155

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997). Reframing orgnizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brislin, R., Worthley, R., & MacNab, B. (2006). Cultural intelligence: Understanding behaviors that serve people’s goals. Group Organization Management, 31, 40-55. Retrieved from SagePub.

Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. S. (2008). Culture and mind: Their fruitful incommensurability. ETHOS, 36, 29-45.

Burke, C. S. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 606-632.

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

Cianciolo, A. T., & Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Intelligence: A brief history. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Cole, M., & Means, B. (1981). Comparative studies of how people think: An introduction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cole, M., Gay, J., Glick, J., & Sharp, D. (1971). The cultural context of learning and thinking. New York: Basic Books.

Cox, J. (1996). Your opinion, please!: How to build the best questionnaires in the field of education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Doing qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Crowne, K. A. (2008). What leads to cultural intelligence? Widener University. Retrieved from https://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu

Danesi, M., & Perron, P. (1999). Analyzing cultures: An introduction and handbook. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

156

Day, C. (2005). Principals who sustain success: Making a difference in schools in challenging circumstances. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 8, 273-290.

Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. A. (2000). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.

Deng, L., & Gibson, P. (2009). Mapping and modeling the capacities that underlie effective cross-cultural leadership. Cross Cultural Management, 16, 347.

Earley, C., & Mosakowski, E. (2004, October). Cultural intelligence. Harvard Business Review, 139-146.

Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Stanford, CA: Stanford Press.

Earley, P. C., Ang, S., & Tan, J. (2006). CQ: Developing cultural intelligence at work. Stanford, CA: Stanford Press.

Eyal, O., & Kark, R. (2004, September). How do transformational leaders transform organizations? A study of the relationship between leadership and entrepreneurship. Leadership & Policy in Schools, 3, 211-235. Retrieved from EBSCOhost database.

Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. Florence, KY: Psychology Press.

Gabel, R. S., Dolan, S. L., & Cerdin, J. L. (2005). Emotional intelligence as predictor of cultural adjustment for success in global assignments. Career Development International, 10(5), 375-395.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York: Basic Books.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research & practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

157

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1997). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Gliner, J. A., & Morgan, G. A. (2000). Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis. Nagwagm, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Golding Hawthorne, M. J. (2009). The leadership behaviors of effective elementary school principals. (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from Udini. (UMI Number 3423470)

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam Books.

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

Halverson, R., Grigg, J., Prichett, R., & Thomas, C. (2007). The new instructional leadership: Creating data-driven instructional systems in schools. Journal of School Leadership, 17(2), 159-193.

Heim, M. (1995). Accountability in education: A primer for school leaders. HSLA Monograph. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED444267)

Hofstede, G. (2006). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. Retrieved from http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/hofstede.htm

Indiana University. (2007a, July 27). Human intelligence: Francis Galton. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/galton.shtml

Indiana University. (2007b, July 25). Human intelligence: Howard Gardner. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/gardner.shtml

Indiana University. (2007c). Human intelligence: L. L. Thurstone. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/lthurstone.shtml

Janssens, M., & Brett, J. M. (2006). Cultural intelligence in global teams: A fusion model of collaboration. Group Organization Management, 31, 124-153. Retrieved from SagePub.

Kotter, J., & Rathgeber, H. (2005). Our iceberg is melting. New York: St. Martin Press.

158

Lather, P. (1992). Critical frames in educational research: Feminist and post-structural perspectives. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 87-99.

Learning and teaching. (2011). Piaget. Retrieved from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/piaget.htm

Leithwood, K. A., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 112-129.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, R. S. (1999). Characteristics of effective secondary school principals’ problem solving. Educational Administration and Foundations, 5(1), 24-42.

Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lindsey, R. B., Robins, K. N., & Terrell, R. D. (2009). Cultural proficiency: A manual for school leaders (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Manna, P. (1999, November 17). Hooked on a feeling. Education Week.

McEwan, E. K. (2003). 10 traits of highly effective principals: From good to great performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

McEwan, E. K. (2009). Teach them ALL to read: Catching kids before they fall through the cracks (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Peterson, M. F., & Smith, P. B. (2000). Meanings, organization and culture: Using sources of meaning to make sense of organizational events. In N. A. Kanasy, C. P. M. Wildersom, & M. F. Petersen (Eds.), Handbook of organizational culture and climate (pp. 101-116). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rammer, R. A. (2007). Call to action for superintendents: Change the way you hire principals. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(2), 67-76.

Robertson, S. A. (2007). Got EQ? Increasing cultural and clinical competence through emotional intelligence. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 29(1), 14-19.

Robottom, I., & Hart, P. (1993). Research in education: Engaging the debate. Australia: Deakin University.

159

Salisbury, C., & McGregor, G. (2005). Principals of inclusive schools. Tempe, AZ: National Institute for Urban School Improvement.

Schmieder, J. H., & Cairns, D. (1996). Ten skills of highly effective principals. Lancaster, PA: Technomic.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). The lifeworld of leadership. Creating culture, community, and personal meaning in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Silins, H., Mulford, B., & Leithwood, K. A. (2002). Educational leadership for organizational learning and improved student outcomes. Netherlands: Kluwer Acdemic Publishers.

Spearman, C. (1904). “General Intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201-293.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Cognitive psychology. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.

Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (2004). International handbook of intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2006). Cultural intelligence and successful intelligence. Group Organization Management, 31, 27-39. Retrieved from SagePub.

Sunderman, G. L., Orfield, G., & Kim, J. S. (2006). The principals denied by NCLB are central to visionary school reform. Principal Leadership, 6, 19-24.

Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2006). Motivational cultural intelligence, realistic job preview, realistic living conditions preview, and cross-cultural adjustment. Group Organization Management, 31, 154-173. Retrieved from SagePub.

Terrell, R. D., & Lindsey, R. B. (2009). Culturally proficient leadership: The personal journey begins within. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

160

Thomas, D. C. (2006). Domain and development of cultural intelligence: The importance of mindfulness. Group Organization Management, 31, 78-99. Retrieved from SagePub.

Thomas, D. C., Eltron E., Stahl, G., Ekelund, B., Ravlin, E. C., Cerdin, J-L., Poelmans, S.,…Lazarova, M. B. (2008). Cultural intelligence: Domain and assessment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8, 123-143. Retrieved from SagePub.

Triandis, H. C. (2006). Cultural intelligence in organizations. Group Organization Management, 31, 20-26. Retrieved from SagePub.

Verner, J. (2007). Check against delivery. Speech given at the Convention on Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, Ottawa, Ontario, December 10, 2007.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). (2008, December 5). Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Intelligence_Scale_for_Children