Languages
Pages
Legal
The Pennsylvania State University
The Graduate School
College of Education
HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS’ ETHICAL DECISIONS: A COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS OF SOCIO-CULTURAL AND STRUCTURAL CONTEXTS IN PAKISTAN
AND UNITED STATES
A Dissertation in
Educational Leadership
and
Comparative and International Education
by
Mehnaz Jehan
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
December 2015
ii
The dissertation of Mehnaz Jehan was reviewed and approved* by the following:
Roger Shouse
Associate Professor of Education
Chair of the Committee
Dissertation Advisor
Jacqueline A. Stefkovich
Professor of Education
Education Policy Studies
Ladislaus M. Semali
Associate Professor of ED (ADTED)
Learning and Performance Systems
James F. Nolan JR.
Harmanowics Professor of Education
Curriculum and Instructions
Kai A. Schafft
Assc. Professor of Education/Rural Sociology
Chair of Graduate Program
* Signatures are on file in the Graduate School.
iii
Abstract
Ethics in educational leadership and comparative educational research place particular emphasis
on exploring contextual realities to develop a comprehensive and holistic understanding of
leadership concepts to improve leadership practices. In this regard, this study aimed at explaining
socio-cultural and structural contexts that shape high school principals’ ethical decision-making
in Pakistan and the United States. The study is comprised of a comprehensive literature review as
well as primary data collection from Pakistan.
I employed qualitative paradigm to achieve the purpose of this study. In depth and semi-
structured interviews provided the main strategy to seek principals’ experiences with ethical
challenges in Pakistan. Furthermore, phenomenological underpinnings informed and guided my
interview strategies. I have not engaged in a formal phenomenological investigation, which
required adapting methods and substantial knowledge of phenomenological philosophy.
Dilemma analysis, a widely used strategy to study ethics in educational leadership, provided
ways of seeking principals’ experiences with ethical challenges and decision-making at two
stages. At the first stage, I shared with the principals two dilemmas depicting real situations in
the context of Pakistan for their comments. At the second stage, I employed “Real life,
respondent generated dilemmas” in an hour and half long semi-structured interviews to help
them think of at least three critical challenges or issues they experienced in their professional
lives.
Findings reveal that the high school principals in Pakistan work in varied environments
and are pulled in different directions. Each direction has its own conflicting demands creating
dilemmas for them. Moreover, the socio-cultural and structural forces impact at various levels
and color principals’ decisions. Since this study takes an initiative of highlighting a need to
iv
understand ethical dimensions of educational leadership in the context of Pakistan, it was limited
in scope. Hence, the study recommends investigating the concept of ethics in depth, focusing on
ethics relative to women in leadership practices, as well as differences in ethical leadership
between private and public school principals.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................................. VII
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................. VIII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................................................... IX
CHAPTER 1 ................................................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND CONTEXT OF THE STUDY .................................................................................... 2
PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS.......................................................................................................................................... 6
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................................................... 7
ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY .................................................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER 2 ................................................................................................................................................................. 9
CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY............................................................................................... 9
HISTORICAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................................... 9
RELIGIOUS CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................................... 11
EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT ......................................................................................................................................... 12
SOCIO-CULTURAL CONTEXT OF PAKISTAN .............................................................................................................. 16
ETHICAL AND MORAL NORMS ................................................................................................................................. 17
IMPACT OF SOCIO-CULTURAL CONTEXT ON SCHOOLING ......................................................................................... 19
CHAPTER 3 ............................................................................................................................................................... 21
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK & LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................ 21
SECTION 1 ................................................................................................................................................................ 21
Socio-Cultural Context ....................................................................................................................................... 22
Societal culture ................................................................................................................................................... 24
Structural/ School Context .................................................................................................................................. 29
Principal’s Leadership........................................................................................................................................ 32
Psycho-moral tensions/ dilemmas ....................................................................................................................... 32
Values, beliefs, and ethical decision-making ...................................................................................................... 34
COMPARATIVE UNDERSTANDING OF ETHICS ........................................................................................................... 38
SECTION II ............................................................................................................................................................... 40
High School Principals’ Responsibilities in Pakistan and United States: Review of Prior Studies ................... 40
SECTION III .............................................................................................................................................................. 56
Comparative Analysis of High School Principals’ Responsibilities: Highlights from the Review of Prior Studies
............................................................................................................................................................................ 56
CHAPTER 4 ............................................................................................................................................................... 63
METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................... 63
RE STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM .......................................................................................................... 63
RESEARCH STRATEGY .............................................................................................................................................. 63
Sample ................................................................................................................................................................. 64
Data collection My primary data came in two phases. ....................................................................................... 64
vi
Analysis of primary data ..................................................................................................................................... 72
Ethical issues ...................................................................................................................................................... 76
Researcher “Bias” .............................................................................................................................................. 77
Delimitations of the study ................................................................................................................................... 80
Researcher’s role ................................................................................................................................................ 80
CHAPTER 5 ............................................................................................................................................................... 82
AN EXAMINATION OF ETHICAL CHALLENGES FOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS IN PAKISTAN
..................................................................................................................................................................................... 82
SECTION I ................................................................................................................................................................. 82
A portrayal of principals’ daily administrative lives .......................................................................................... 82
Textural Descriptions/ Principals’ Stories .......................................................................................................... 88
EMERGENT THEMES ................................................................................................................................................. 98
Geselschaft vs. Gemeinschaft: Intense pull between organizational bureaucracy and “organic” demands ..... 98
Pressure of culture/ religious mores: “Unwritten Rules” ................................................................................ 102
Intensity of potential of threats to survival ....................................................................................................... 105
“A tussle between emotional and professional aspects of working as a principal” ......................................... 108
SECTION II ............................................................................................................................................................. 110
Principals’ responses to the researchers’ vignettes .......................................................................................... 110
SECTION III ............................................................................................................................................................ 118
Synthesis of data from phase I & II ................................................................................................................... 118
CHAPTER 6 ............................................................................................................................................................. 121
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS .................................................................................................................. 121
SECTION 1: DISCUSSION A MULTIPOLAR ENVIRONMENT.................................................................................... 122
Socio-cultural context ....................................................................................................................................... 123
Global context ................................................................................................................................................... 125
SECTION II ............................................................................................................................................................. 128
Comparative analysis of socio-cultural and structural contexts ....................................................................... 128
SECTION III ............................................................................................................................................................ 131
Implications ...................................................................................................................................................... 131
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 136
APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................................................... 142
TWO TIER INTERVIEW FORMAT: VIGNETTES & PROTOCOL .............................................................. 142
APPENDIX B ........................................................................................................................................................... 145
INFORMED CONSENT FORM ............................................................................................................................ 145
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Map of Pakistan ………………………………………………………..........................9
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework …………………………………………….............................22
Figure 3: Hierarchy of a culture and multi-level cultures (Cheong 2000)…………....................23
Figure 4: Review of Prior Studies ……………………………………………………................44
Figure 5: Nature of Issues ……………………………………………………………………....83
Figure 6: Multipolar Environment …………………………………………………………......122
viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Similarities and Differences in Principals’ Responsibilities in Pakistan and United
State………………………………………………………………………………………56
Table 2: Research on Socio-cultural and Structural Contexts in Pakistan and United
States……………………………………………………………………………………..67
Table 3: Prior Studies Selected for Review……………………………………………………...68
ix
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to my Dissertation Advisor Dr. Roger Shouse. Without his support and guidance, I
would not have been in the PhD program at Penn State. I am also thankful to Dr. Semali who
introduced me to the world of Comparative and International Education and guided me through
various courses. I also extend my deepest regards to Dr. Stefkovich who sparked my interest in
the concept of Ethics in Educational Leadership. My gratitude also goes for Dr. Nolan whose
mentoring during my Humphrey Fellowship Program at Penn State helped me with professional
development opportunities within and outside State College.
I am thankful to Aga Khan Education Services, Pakistan (AKESP, North) for providing me with
the professional opportunities during my employment. I also appreciate the support extended to
me during my data collection in Pakistan.
In addition, I thank all my friends and colleagues who have contributed in my intellectual growth
in many ways.
x
Dedicated to
My father: for his Inspiration
My mother: for her dream
My husband: for his support
My daughter: for her future
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
This study stems from my desire to look at ethical aspects of principals’ decision-making
in the context of Pakistan. My experience of working as a principal of a girls’ school, in
Northern Areas (Gilgit-Baltistan) of Pakistan, yielded unique insights about principals’ work in
that context. I worked in an environment, which always seemed to force my decisions in
direction I least desired empathetically as well as professionally. Sometimes situations resulted
in sleepless nights thinking about the right courses of action and consequences of my decisions.
As a leader, the responsibility of making the right choices and picking the right courses of action
lied upon my shoulder. I realized that I was expected to make decisions meeting others’ wishes
rather than following policy. I had to be extra cautious in making the right choices.
However, I did not know what to name this process until I enrolled in Ph.D. program and
took courses in Ethics in Educational Leadership at Pennsylvania State University. I learned
about ethical decision-making processes and how principals address challenges keeping in mind
the “best interest of the students” (Stefkovich 2005). Thus, my assessment of my experiences and
learning of ethical frameworks in educational leadership program developed my interest in
carrying out a study to yield an understanding about ethical challenges for Pakistani principals
and see how these ethical challenges are different or similar from the principals’ challenges in
the United States.
The purpose of this chapter is to present a case about the importance of understanding the
nature of ethical challenges in Pakistani schools while providing a picture of differences in a
Western and Eastern context like Pakistan.
2
Statement of the Problem and Context of the Study
The fundamental ingredients forming a school culture include values, beliefs, practices,
and its members. While the fundamental recipes of school culture in Pakistan and United States
may be similar, they may pose differences. How principals go about solving ethical challenges in
one context, may be remarkably different in the other. For instance, in Pakistan Principals work
in a highly complex social setting where their interactions as decision makers carry the influence
of culture, ethnicity, language, religious beliefs and contradictions from historical legacy. In the
United States, however, similar socio-cultural forces may be at play, historical legacies may
account for deep differences. The following vignette from a school in Pakistan serves to illustrate
the peculiar differences in both contexts.
Scenario: This incident took place at one of colleges for girls situated in an urban area.
The college had a dormitory for students from far off areas. The dorm had strict rules about the
students’ visitors and guardians.
One night the warden discovered that a student did not return after the weekend. This
created a stir among the boarding staff, and the warden decided to, immediately, inform the
principal of the matter. The next morning the principal arrived and asked other students if they
knew the missing girl’s whereabouts. Meanwhile, the girl arrived to attend her classes, but, as
soon as the principal saw the student, she addressed her in front of everyone. The principal, after
asking, “Where is your boyfriend?” Go bring your boyfriend, right now,” ordered the student to
pack up, and leave the dorm. She would no longer stay in the dorm, but she could continue her
studies at the college. After experiencing such humiliation, the student could not continue her
studies and left, never to be seen again.
3
Examining this vignette highlights some pertinent differences in the socio-cultural and
structural levels of the schooling in Pakistan and United States. For instance, the principal’s
reaction reflects a pressure to maintain a certain code of conduct for girls that conforms to that
society’s values of chastity and modesty. The reaction also reflects principal’s assumptions
(deeply ingrained) that if the girl spent a night out it must have been with a boy, which is taboo
in the religious and social context of Pakistan. Hence, the principal was confronted with societal
norms and standards as she worked to make the decision to expel the student from the dormitory.
On the other hand, a principal in the United States might have been concerned with the student’s
safety and security rather than thinking about whether or not the student spent the night with a
boyfriend. At a structural level, the principal had the authority and discretion to make a decision
on the spot without even involving any other stakeholders such as parents. Moreover, parents of
the student reacting to that decision withdrew their daughter. Moreover, the student’s voice was
absent. The student did not have a chance to clarify or justify her position. The student paid the
price for her action in the form of humiliation, expulsion and disgrace by her family. However,
such a decision could have been challenged in the court had it been in the United States’ setting.
So, these social values and norms color principals’ personal and professional values so
much so that they often follow what is “right” according to the society’s standards instead what
is “in the best interest of the student” (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2011). The best interest of the
student is often defined by the society and implemented by the guardians of the social norms and
values. Hence, norms and expectations in Pakistani society “…have a significant effect on the
behavior [and values] of head teachers and those with whom they interact” (Simkkins et.al. 1998,
p.138). Culture defines the “equation” principals use to balance needs of students with other
defined needs of the institution.
4
In addition, Pakistani principals are caught in the midst of socio-cultural system that does
not provide a space to discuss such problems explicitly because of an emphasis on silencing the
complex ethical issues for the sake of group uniformity, which helps preserving cultural
integrity. Most importantly, the principals and their colleagues may not even be aware of the
importance of discussing such issues because the cultural norms and practices overwhelm the
individual’s rights to respect, honor and choice. Hence, no attention has been paid, neither in the
research scholarship, nor in the professional trainings to understand the nature of complex issues
and how principals have to combat them when faced with resolving ethical challenges.
Also, although often the professional practices are informed by Western theories of
teaching and learning, many practices and ideas seem resistant to western ideas. For instance,
corporal punishment is discouraged in the western schools. However, corporal punishment has a
deep-rooted importance in Pakistani society at all levels including the school. It is considered an
important aspect of teachers or principals’ authority to discipline the child. Hence, without
understanding the local realities, the Westerners’ ideas may not help much in improving the
professional Eastern practices at a substantial level. Therefore, the field of comparative
education provides a window “…to understand how two systems, at the levels of the group and
individual, relate to each other” (Tiandis & Berry 1981, p.106) in terms of practice and meanings
attached to those practices. Therefore, the investigation of practices in the local settings, and
people’s understanding and meaning of the concepts are part of the comparative studies. For this
purpose, the comparativists in educational research suggest to “seek[ing] out units of analysis
that are intrinsically appropriate to the task in hand” (Philips 2006, p. 313).In this regard,
comparativisits emphasize to take “comparability” and “equivalence” into account.
5
Comparability refers to the condition “existing when two measures are expressed in the
same units thus making possible direct comparison” (Good cited in Raivola 1985, p. 362) In
other words; the elements of the concept under study are of the same level. Triandis and Berry
(1981), further, explain “…when a common underlying process exists can there be the possibility
of interpreting differences in behavior. When such dimensional identity or common underlying
process is demonstrated, then comparability is established”(p. 8). In this regard, high principals’
decision-making processes in the contexts of Pakistan and United States provide a basis for
comparability in my study.
Equivalence: is “a state of being essentially equal or equivalent” (Google dictionary).
Equivalence is to establish the level of individuality/ uniqueness of the instrument and the groups
under study in order to achieve comparison. Triandis & Berry (1981) divide equivalence into
categories of “functional” and “conceptual” equivalences. The former refers to comparison
between people or institutions in the form of a similar problem that generates behavior with a
similar purpose. For instance, functional equivalence in comparative studies specifies same level
of teachers, students, socio-economic background, gender of the students and teachers. As such
in the study high school principals’ experiences of ethical challenges in Pakistan are compared
with the secondary school principals’ experiences of ethical challenges in the United States.
Conceptual equivalence, on the other hand, refers to a representation of a common
ground between theory and phenomenon to “…discover the local meaning of concepts within the
cognitive systems of the people and groups being compared” (Triandis and Berry 1981, p.9).
Raivola (1985) calls it cultural equivalence and emphasizes that the “comparative analysis
should focus attention on the isomorphism of the elements of the systems” which can be
described through evidence including stories, rules and the ways things are done in a culture.
6
This implies that the strategy to getting to the meanings people attach to the concepts in different
culture should be uniform which can be either seen through observations, interviews or any other
way.
“Comparability” and “equivalence” are relevant to my study at two levels. Firstly, I have
analyzed secondary data in the form of empirical studies, which focus on high school principals’
work in Pakistan and United States. I have described the procedure in detail in the chapter on
methodology. Secondly, conceptual equivalence, in my study, is evident in the form of literature
about the concept of ethics in Islam and comparison of it to the western practices. This will help
readers understand the concept in a culture other than their own and to be able to comprehend the
principals’ practices, experiences, and nature of ethical challenges in a Pakistani context. A
detailed discussion is provided in the chapter on literature review.
Purpose and Questions
Thus, the purpose of my study is to explain socio-cultural and structural context that
shape ethical decision of secondary school principals in Pakistan and United States and highlight
differences in meaning. I also strive to identify a) the structural context in which secondary
school principals construct their ethical decisions in Pakistan and United States, b) identify
challenges they experience in constructing and implementing their ethical decisions. The
following questions guided my purpose.
- What are the socio-cultural contexts that shape the meaning and practices of ethical decision
making among secondary school principals in Pakistan and United States?
- In which structural context do principals construct their ethical decisions in Pakistan and United
States?
7
- What challenges do they experience in implementing those decisions in Pakistan and United
States?
Significance of the study
The study is significant at three levels:
Firstly, it brings to the fore complexities of the socio cultural system that pose ethical
challenges for principals in Pakistan. These complexities have gone largely unexamined locally
and globally, and which, in the context of Pakistan are critical to consider in light of issues
related to improving principals’ practices. Often the research studies that revolve around the
importance of the role of principals’ decision-making in Pakistani schools have focused on the
applicability of the western theories of school leadership. Western theories assume western way
of thought and western social realities that do not match to the local reality.
Secondly, findings will illuminate school policy and provide a direction for training
school principals about the complexity of ethical dilemmas in school leadership. It will help set a
direction for the training programs to target their focus to ethical implications of the principals’
decision.
Thirdly, literature emphasizes investigating the applicability of Western theories of
school leadership in other contexts. Hence, the study will add to the existing knowledge base
about principals’ experiences of ethical challenges in a non-Western context, and it will add a
new insight to the ethical dilemmas in Educational leadership.
Organization of the Study
The first chapter serves to orient the reader of the importance of contextualizing ethical
decision making by highlighting the differences in socio-cultural and structural contexts. The
second chapter describes the socio-cultural context of Pakistan. The third chapter discusses
8
framework and literature review that helped to conceptualize this study. This chapter also sets
base for comparative analysis of socio-cultural and structural contexts through review of
empirical studies about high school principals’ work in Pakistan and United States. The fourth
chapter details the methodology used to carry out this study. Chapter five presents findings and
analysis of primary data collected in Pakistan. Last chapter details the discussion, implications
and limitations of the study.
9
Chapter 2
Contextual Background of the Study
The purpose of this chapter is to describe Pakistani society in general to help reader
develop a holistic picture of the relationship between ethical challenges discussed in chapter 4
and socio-cultural and structural context. In Pakistan, such ethical conflicts arise in a traditional
and highly complex socio-cultural system, which poses serious problems for school principals
wishing to promote equitable and effective learning among all types of students.
Figure 1: Map of Pakistan
Source: www.google.com
Historical Context
Pakistan, formally known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, came into existence on August 14,
1947 because of the efforts of the founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah and other Muslim leaders.
Contemporary Pakistan bordering “Iran and Afghanistan on the West, India on the east, and the
Arabian Sea on the south is strategically located to the east of the Persian Gulf and in close
proximity to China and Russia” (Talbot 1998, p.21).
10
Contemporary Pakistan consists of four provinces: Punjab, Sindh, Pukhtunkhwa,
Balochistan. In addition, there are other regional territories: Federally Administered Tribal Areas
(FATA), and Gilgit-Baltistan (Formerly known as Federally Administered Northern Areas,
FANA). Islamabad, a federal territory, is capital of the country (Salfi & Saeed, 2007). All areas
circumscribing contemporary Pakistan have cultural, traditional and linguistic variation, which
make each distinctive. However, what binds them all is the religion of Islam, which was the
backdrop of creation of Pakistan and a national language Urdu.
The contemporary Pakistan includes the areas that were once the hub of the Indus Valley,
which is known for well-organized, agricultural, political, educational and social systems. Then
the arrival of Aryan in 1500 to 2000 BC brought Hindusim to the region. History for the South
Asian Subcontinent also witnessed the emergence of Christian era. Then conquerors and sufis
brought Islam to the South Asian Subcontinent. Mohammad Bin Qasim was the first Muslim
conqueror who overcame Sindh (one of the four provinces in Pakistan) in AD 712, and thereafter
the growth of Islam took place during the seventh and eight centuries ( Malik 2006). During this
period an “Indo-Islamic culture flourished within a tolerant and blended milieu where Sufi
poetry and similar mystical literature by Hindu Bhagats and Sikh Gurus flourished concurrently.
Along with social and cultural development in the region, the Muslim rulers in the
Subcontinent considered education an important task. Different measures were taken during
different eras. For instance, education was made free for anyone who wanted to educate
themselves or their children from the time of Mohammad Bin Qasim (695-715) to the Mughal
Emperors Humayoun (1540-1556). According to the historians, these measures ended the
class/cast systems prevalent in the subcontinent before the dawn of Islam. As a result, many
Hindus from the lowest castes converted to Islam and benefitted from such measures. However,
11
with the fall of Mughal emperor and beginning of British rule, education took a different turn.
Now education was considered synonymous with the English language and all were required to
abandon their language and be schooled in English.
According to the historians, the requirement to learn English created a wide gap as some
Muslims resisted because they considered it against their Islamic traditions and some could not
afford English education. In other words, many considered the British system as elite’s system.
This created a system of “high and low classes” (Khalid & Khan 2006). It was during the British
Raj that took place in 1857, Muslims of the Subcontinent realized a need for a separate homeland
because of “the circumstances_ political, social, and many economic....” (Burki 1986, p.1).
Hence, Pakistan came into existence on August 14, 1947. However, Pakistan has, in its
short sixty year political history, gone through varied political turbulences and “has tried half-
dozen different political systems and four formal constitutions, promulgated in 1946,1956, 1962,
and 1973, respectively” (Burki 1986, p.2). Although “political and constitutional struggles” led
to the way of creating Pakistan, “the country faced military governments …while politicians
were either incapacitated in establishing enduring democratic institutions or simply proved
incompetent” (Malik 2006).
Religious Context
Pakistan is an Islamic country that was created for the Muslims of subcontinent and the
population is of 97% Muslim. However, “as an institutionalized religion, the house of Islam is
divided into sects, jurisprudential schools, and spiritual tariqas (circles). As such, Sunnis
represent 80% of the total and Shias constitute the other 20%. All sects “agree on basic beliefs
and practices; it is only on the interpretations of their religion and early Muslim history that they
differ (Malik 2006, p.34). Islam as a religion is very significant and a strong part of each
12
Muslim’s life. Individuals are taught about their religious obligations. Families as well as other
social and religious institutions e.g. schools and mosques emphasize on individual accountability
to religious responsibilities (Stewart, Bond, & Zaman, 1999).Moreover, religious interpretations
and cultural customs dictate ethical and moral norms and relationships in Pakistani society.
Analyzing the changes in the Pakistani society and the role of religion in Pakistani
society since 1947, Qadeer (2006) opines, “ …the rise of political Islam and global Islamic
movements have become potent forces in the reorganization of the Pakistani society. Islamism,
as a force of social change, is a distinct phenomenon in Pakistan” (p.18).
Moreover, Hakim & Aziz (1998) identify local maulvi (local religious leaders), the
maulana or Ulemma and the pir as types of religious authority performing the task of interpreting
religion to the masses. For these maulivis and maulana “Islamic society is based on complete
segregation of sexes and the subordination of women to men” (p.731).
On the contrary, according to Hussain (1987) cited in Hakim & Aziz (1998)
reduction of the status of women by the religious scholars is a proof of a double standard
for modesty and chastity, one for men and another for women. The Quran fixed a
uniform standard … [for] both sexes…. But the ulema in the classical age discounted the
ability of the woman to guard her chastity, and advocated her segregation from male
society. Unobtrusively, the woman, through the negative attitude of segregation thrust
upon her by the ulema, was made sentinel of male chastity. This is what the present day
ulema deduce from the seclusion and veiling of women (p.731).
This implies that there is a huge dichotomy between maulvis and educated / secular
scholars like Hussain in terms of their understanding of ethical and moral norms set by the
religion. Most importantly, this dichotomy exists in the Muslim world at large.
Educational Context
At the time of creation in 1947, Pakistan faced enormous challenges. It both had a huge
task of settling the refugees, and establishing a political track for the country. Education was one
13
of the sectors that faced huge challenges at the time of partition, afterwards, and still. The
country has not been able to address educational issues due to “bad governance, and red tape,
apathy, corruption, short-lived governments, conflicting policies, confusion and lack of
direction” (Khalid & Khan 2006, p.309). The fundamental challenge is a lack of consensus as to
what the purpose of education should be and how to achieve it. One stratum views education as
a means of achieving the ideology of Islam or Islamic life, which is considered the basis for
creation of Pakistan. One group thinks that modern education with emphasis on science and
technology should be part of education encouraging that our youth is capable of discovering
knowledge rather than receiving knowledge. More importantly, in general “education is not
perceived as a vital, central need of Pakistani society: it is, therefore, not accorded protection
enjoyed by other institutions” (Hoodhbhoy 1998, p.4).
Thus, it has been a dream to see our young girls and boys alike in schools. When it comes
to girl’s education, the situation seems more dismal as girls are more at risk of not enrolling in
schools or dropping out of school due to economic, socio-cultural and religious interpretations
and behaviors. Upadhyah, Barton and Zahur (2005) identify three important factors that lead to
low enrollment of girls in poor communities. “Education is not highly valued in poor
communities because it does not increase a girls’ economic or occupational status. Early
marriages of daughters lead to lower returns on the education investments for girls, and girls
need to help with child care and other duties of the home” (p. 730).
Education System: Education is the responsibility of the state. Nonetheless, there are
various systems running in the country due to lack of governments’ interest in improving quality
of public education. Moreover, the public system is way underperformed as a huge amount of
national budget goes to defense. Khalid and Khan (2006) identify six major groups of
14
educational institutions: “government run, Christian missionary, institutions run by the
community members or local organizations, English only private schools, community schools
and colleges and religious educational institutions” (p. 311). These systems run with huge
differences in “their curricula, infrastructure and fee and salary structure” (Azam 2009, p.11).
In addition, the public education system is highly centralized with a federal minister at
the top who plans and monitors education in the country, and implementation is the
responsibility of the Provincial Education Departments, district governments and NGOs (Oduro
et.al. 2007, Farah & Rizvi 2007, Rizvi 2008). A Curriculum Wing (CW) in the ministry performs
the task of writing curricula for the whole country and deviation from it yields serious
consequences. Analyzing the role of CW, Hoodhboy (1998) postulates, “the curricula devised by
its ‘experts’ often have the wrong emphases, containing outdated concepts, and not providing for
a relevant and useful education. Instead, the CW appears preoccupied with the propagation of
ideological doctrines rather than proper education of children” (p.11). Furthermore, criticizing
the ideological aspects, Talibani (1996) opines: “the emphasis on ideological education has
intensified cultural and religious differences, resulting in communal conflicts and resentment of
other cultures and other areas of knowledge” (p. 82).
In addition, Azam (2009) points to the treatment of the students in public schools and
asserts that corporal punishment is a common norm that affects “self-esteem or self-respect.”
Moreover, “…their sense of relative deprivation gets intensified when they find themselves
unable to compete with the graduates of English medium institutions and cadet schools and
colleges for employment and other opportunities” (p. 11).
Although efforts were made to decentralize the education system by empowering districts
to plan and manage its resources since 2001, the efforts did not come to fruition. Oduro et.al.
15
(2007) reviewed studies that counted factors for this failure such as, tension between district and
provincial education departments over their respective roles and authority, increased interference
by local politicians in the district education offices…weak school- community relationships and
lack of collaboration between district education administration and school management
committees….” (p.10).
Private educational institutions (not all of them though) are characterized by “wealthy
individuals, a Board of Governors, politico-religious organization (NGO), and International non-
governmental organizations (INGO)” (Khan 2012). Depending on where the private educational
institution is located, the schools try to provide better resources in terms of teachers, furniture
and other facilities. It is critical to note that what binds the private and public system is an
emphasis on an annual examination system and students’ test scores.
In the Madrassa system, education is free along with lodging and food. However, the
education system is extremely traditional where the students are considered “empty vessels” and
the teachers’ authority is ultimately and unquestioned. The emphasis is on transmission of
knowledge in which “education is the downward communication of a fixed body of knowledge
given from somewhere or by somebody” (Hoodbhoy 1998, p.6).
In addition, a highly- centralized system curtails a head teacher’s role as leader” (Oduro,
Dachi, Fertig, Rareiya 2007, p.15). Concluding a study, Donald & Warwick (n.d.) asserts, “with
no clear definition of who they are and what they are supposed to do, school heads are adrift in
the educational system” (p.21). As such, Oduro et.al. (2007) cite Swai (2002) in highlighting the
cultural realities of the education system and its challenges, “school leaders are not questioned
or criticized [by parents], school management and parents do not trust the teachers; leadership
16
positions are ‘protected’ by those in post; and educational policies largely reflect political agenda
and therefore, do not promote efficiency or accountability” (p. 15).
Socio-cultural Context of Pakistan
Islam (2004) used Hofstead’s four-dimensional model of national cultures (power
distance, individuality, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance) as an analytical framework to
analyze characteristics of Pakistan’s contemporary administrative culture. Although his analysis
focuses on administrative culture in Pakistan, these characteristics are generalizable to other
spheres of life as well, because “the societal norms have led to the development and pattern
maintenance of institutions in society with particular structures and ways of functioning. These
institutions, once established, reinforce the societal norms and the ecological conditions that led
to their establishment” (Hofstead 2001, p.11).
For instance, Pakistani society has a high- power distance characteristic, which can be
observed in the social institution of family structure e.g., relations between husband and wife,
brother and sister, son and daughter. Since the society is patriarchal in nature, the family is led by
an “eldest male who occupies a position of paramount authority,” who exerts this authority to
subjugate all family members to “religious and ethical obligations” (Hakim & Aziz 1998, p.50).
Furthermore, “family, biradari (clan), tribe, and ethnicity define an individual’s place in
society and inform her/his beliefs and behaviors” (Qadeer 2006, p.188), which creates dynamic
relationships between individual and society (Islam 2004). Upadhyah et.a. (2005) elucidate this
relationship;
Pakistan has a layered identity. A Pakistani has a religious identity (as a Muslim) an
ethnic identity (e.g. Punjabi or Sindhi), a national identity (Pakistani), a caste identity,
and a Biradai identity. These identities are greatly influenced by larger social structures
and customs and together provide a Pakistani with a set of expectations and social norms
for living (p. 729).
17
These multiple roles and relationships sometimes cloud his/ her individuality because
they place constant pressure and accountability on an individual in the form of expectations of
loyalty. Since, biradari dominates the social life of its members, so deviation from it may result
in serious consequences making it inevitable to keep intact with biradari norms to preserve their
identities. This has led to a “kinship-based social structure” resulting in a culture of “sifarish”
(kin networking) as a way of influencing the decision-making process and gaining personal
benefits (Islam 2004). As such, “as more and more rules are created to avoid uncertainty, more
ingenious ways of circumventing the rules are favored simultaneously” (Islam 2004, p.324).
Ethical and Moral Norms
Most of the contemporary practices are a blend of Islamic and local cultural practice
because of a shared political cultural history between Pakistan and India. When Islam came to
the subcontinent, many Hindus converted, but they retained many of their local and traditional
customs, which blended with the customs and values of the Muslims who brought Islam to the
subcontinent. For instance, the system of land ownership that led to feudal practices governs part
of religious practices in some of the regions in the country.
These practices have created a void between the majority and the landowners (minority)
who exert a strong control over the lives of these poor people (Hakim & Aziz 1998, Azhar
2009). In addition, in Pakistan, gender roles are predefined in terms of religious, social, cultural
norms and values. This differentiation in gender roles has resulted in inequalities especially for
women. Islam (2004) attributes exclusion and segregation of women to purdah that inhibits
women’s movement as much as possible.
18
Hakim and Aziz (1998) describe two categories of restriction on women in Pakistan
society, which may be a blend of various local cultural and religious practices. The first category
includes “legal restriction and inequalities” based on the interpretation from Quran, Hadith,
Sunnah and traditional Sharia laws for “legislating women’s inequality and legitimizing the
gender relations of feudal/tribal origins” (Qadeer 2006, p.201). “Purdah-hiding of women from
men” (p.730) constitutes the second catergory. Mirza analyzes that the function of veiling,
as a behavior code imposed on women in order to reduce sexual tension in public places
presents a good example of the fact that within the purdah-system it is basically the
women-not the men- who are made responsible for maintaining gender segregation
(p.18).
But Weiss (2001) asserts,
When a female seeks to traverse social boundaries, the objection raised seldom
questions whether she will behave herself properly or what she might do wrong, but
instead ‘what ill others think?’ It is not the intrinsic value of the female’s action but the
social value placed on respectability_ izzat and sharafat_ that has long suppressed
women’s inventiveness in response to challenges (p.68).
Thus, “if a man should violate a social norm, it may raise some concern, but if a woman
violates virtually any social norm, it becomes a calamitous event for her family, with disastrous
results for the woman’s future” (Mirza 2002, p.30). There is a difference between how men and
women are judged for their behavior.
However, Qadeer (2006) presents three models of femininity in Pakistani society because
of the changes in the social history of the country. First is a traditional Muslim woman who
remains at the house as part of her moral, social and religious obligations. Second is a modern
woman who has acquired “liberal values” through education or social class and is seen publically
in her career or profession. Third are the women who “imbibes religious piety, puritanical
19
values, and demands a share in public life be it a job or political socialization” (p.200). It is
pertinent to note that all three kinds of women are also cultural traditions bound (Qadeer 2006).
Impact of Socio-cultural Context on Schooling
The, religious and socio-cultural practices have a strong impact on all aspects of life
especially schooling in Pakistan. This impact can be observed in many ways. For instance,
“schooling…is gender segregated to conform to Islamic ideology” (Chowdhury 1996, p.192).
Girls’ schools face strict rules in terms of maintaining discipline and ethically/morally
appropriate behaviors. Any movement or action that seems to violate the rule is considered
morally suspicious. Therefore, girls are under serious scrutiny to maintain their “izzat”
(decency).
Consequently, schools are a place to reinforce the social norms and perceptions about
women’s participation in the wider sphere of life. Those girls who have opportunities to go to
schools receive an education that reiterates the emphasis on their roles and responsibilities as
mothers and wives (Weiss 2001, Azhar 2009). Otherwise, “in culturally restrictive environments,
adolescent girls may be viewed as morally suspect if they continue going to school” (Chowdhury
1996, p.199).
Moreover, “school teaching is oriented toward …monitoring behavior” (Updhyaha et.a.
2005). The tension for a principal of a girls’ school is to strive to help her students to get the
freedom to think and empower themselves through education, and monitor their behavior in a
way that girls do not deviate from the societal norms. Hence, the principals of the girls’ schools
are as scrutinized as girls are, to maintain the societal expectations and moral standards.
Therefore, principals, out of fear of damaging reputation for the institutions, try to be as strict in
their monitoring of girls as possible.
20
In short, Pakistani society presents multiple complexities for its members especially
educational leaders. The fundamental principles of the society stem from religious ethics
interpreted through a cultural lens. Accordingly, there is a clear distinction and definition of the
roles each member has to play within a family, tribe or society at large.
21
Chapter 3
Conceptual Framework & Literature Review
This chapter consists of three sections. Section I presents the conceptual framework of
the study followed by a comprehensive review of the literature. This literature is, further,
supplemented by a comparative understanding of the construct of ethics in Islam versus West.
Section two presents a review of empirical studies about the high school principals’ work in
Pakistan and United States followed by a synthesis in the third section.
Section 1
The conceptual framework in this study takes a cultural lens to understand “culture’s
influence” to establish educational leadership in the Pakistani context. Walker (2003) places an
enormous emphasis on using the concept of culture to understand leadership practices as ethics
and leadership are culturally constructed. (p. 150). School principals in particular work in a
framework constructed and defined by contextual realities. Hence, this framework focuses on
culture at societal/national/community level and school/organizational level, which interact to
influence school process. The unit of analysis is the high school principal because their work is
framed by contextual realities.
22
Figure2: Conceptual Framework
Socio-cultural and Structural Complexities and Psycho Moral Tensions for Principals
Four main elements define the structure of the framework above: socio-cultural context,
structural context, and principals’ leadership and psycho-moral tensions. The subsequent sections
explain each element in the light of the literature.
Socio-Cultural Context
What is Culture?
There is not a single definition of culture in the literature to have a definite idea of what it
is. Hofstead (2007), a pioneer in generating discourse about the differences in cultures across
nations, views it as “collective programming of the mind, which distinguishes one group or
category of people from another” (Hofstead 2007, p.484). Schein (2004) describes cultures as
“the accumulated shared learning of a given group, covering behavioral, emotional, and
Socio cultural
context
-cultural/religious
dispositions
-cultural/religious
interpretation
-values and beliefs
Structural/ School
Context
-day to day
operations within the
school
-vision/mission
-policies
-culture
Principal Leadership
-Personal values & beliefs
-Professional values / beliefs
Psycho-moral tensions
- Cognitive Dissonance
- Moral discords
23
cognitive elements of the group members’ total psychological functioning” (P.17). For Swindler
(1986), culture is a “tool kit of symbols, stories, rituals, and world-views” (p.273). For Walker
(1998) “Culture is learned, not inherited. It derives from one’s social environment, not from
one’s genes. (p.570). This implies that culture is not something one is born with: rather, it is
acquired through experiences, and exposure to a certain environment.
Accumulating the views of Hofstead, Neuijen, Ohayv, & Sanders, (1990), Pettigrew
(1990) Detert, Schroeder & Mauriel (2000) describe it as “…holistic, historically-determined,
and socially constructed, and it involves beliefs and behaviors, exists at a variety of levels, and
manifests itself in a wide range of features of organizational life” (p.851). Cheong (2000) also
pulls various aspects of culture together, agreed upon by other scholars, and defines it as “as
system of shared assumptions, beliefs, values, and behaviors in a given group, community, or
nation” (p.209). In a nutshell, culture is an amalgamation of values, beliefs, and practices that
also functions as a form of social control. As such, values and beliefs craft a framework for
ethical practices, and principals are expected to conform to the framework and integrate the
values into their practices. Cheong (2000) further presents a “hierarchy of culture” at many
levels.
Figure 3: Hierarchy of a culture & multi-level cultures (Cheong 2000)
Multi- level Culture
Hierarchy of a culture classroom culture school culture community culture societal/ national
Superficial classroom social norms school social norms community social norms societal social norms
Values shared in the values shared in the values shared in the values shared in
Classroom classroom community nature
Deep assumptions shared assumptions shared assumptions shared assumptions shared in
in the classroom in the classroom in the community the society/ nation
24
Cheong (2000) further presents six propositions to explain the relationship among
different levels of culture. Firstly, the contextual culture can directly or indirectly affect the
school members through their behaviors/ attitudes or values and beliefs. Secondly, “pre-existing
characteristics” (personal values and beliefs) may play a role in resisting or surrendering to the
contextual culture. Thirdly, shared values, beliefs and assumptions result in a strong culture at
any level. Next, contextual culture may affect motivation to perform directly or indirectly.
Lastly, the performance of the school members may be constrained though organizational and
structural culture of the school. Moreover, it is also important to note that the lowest level is the
least variable and the most difficult to verbalize or explain. The top level, however, will tend to
vary, especially in terms of individual values.
Societal culture
Epstein (1989) postulates, “like individuals, nations have explicit and implicit belief
systems…covert culture, manifested in what people say and write about how one should behave,
a covert culture whose rules must be inferred from how people actually behave” (p.20).
Although the study of culture as a variable to understand “human behavioral patterns,
social norms, ceremonies, values and beliefs at community and national level” (Cheong 2000,
p.209) takes its roots from the field of anthropology, the concept of culture as an analytical tool
has seeped through the field of educational administration and leadership. More importantly, the
phenomenon of globalization developed an awareness and understanding of cross-cultural
studies to analyze the compatibility of Western theories of education in other contexts. As a
result, the concept of culture (at the societal level) as an analytical tool to understand the
relationship between leadership practices has made its way into educational leadership research
because:
25
It [culture] influences the predilections of individual leaders as well as the nature of
interactions with others in the school and its community. Moreover, it determines the
particular educational emphasis or goals that prevail within a culture’s system of
schooling (Hallinger & Leithwood, 1998, p.132).
For instance, the proponents of societal culture as a lens to understand school leadership
emphasize culture to help “rethink constructs that have been taken for granted and identify new
problems of significance” (Hallinger & Leithwood 1996), as well as to develop “comparative
model[s] of educational leadership and management, based on cultural and cross cultural
analysis” (Dimmock & Walker 2000). The use of societal culture in understanding educational
leadership practices is also pertinent because:
The concept of culture captures reality by enabling explanations of human and
organizational behavior to be expressed in terms of interactions between individuals
(their personalities), the organizations and institutions in which they live and work, and
the larger environment that circumscribe both (Dimmock & Walker 1998, p.562).
This implies that culture as a basic determinant develops a holistic picture of concepts
under study, especially in the field of educational leadership. For instance, Walker and Hallinger
(2007) draw an extremely powerful and inevitable pictures of what happens when western
notions are applied without taking into consideration the deep culturally-held beliefs and
realities:
in general, East Asians are supposed to be less concerned with personal goals or self-
aggrandizement than are Westerners. Group goals and coordinated activities are more
often the concern. Maintaining harmonious social relationships is like to take precedence
over achieving personal success. Success is often sought as a group rather than as a
person badge of merit. Individual distinctiveness is not particularly desirable. For Asian,
feeling good about themselves is likely to be tied to a sense that they are in harmony with
the wishes of the groups to which they belong and the meeting with the group’s
expectations. Equality of treatment is not assured nor is it necessarily regarded as
desirable (Walker & Hallinger 2007, p.49).
26
Therefore, notions such as “democratic community, community of learning and teaching,
empowerment, individuality, community involvement” that emphasize on the importance of
individuals and individuality, equality, and creativity when taken to the Eastern context may
“collide with the existing cultural norms of East Asian societies.”
For this purpose, Dimmock & Walker (1998) view the use of culture to uncover
deeper organizational phenomenon that may appear to be disguised or hidden by
apparent surface similarities. The conceptual and analytic properties of culture can help
expose the more covert aspects of school organization as well as promote the
investigation of relationships between schools and their immediate and the larger
environment (P.562).
For example, in the words of Hallinger (2004)
This means that principals tend to accept the orders of their superiors just as teachers
accept the orders of their principals. People find it uncomfortable, inappropriate, and
impolite to question authority in ways that would be considered quite mild in low power
distance cultures such as the US or Australia. This has been the natural order within
Asian educational bureaucracies for past generations, and more broadly within Southeast
Asian societies at large (P.68).
Nonetheless, Dimmock & Walker (1998) point to confusion surrounding the concept of
culture when it is used in relation to the organization. According to them, there is a disagreement
among cultural theorists “whether culture is something a school has or is.” One school of thought
treats culture “as a variable” which the school has and which can be “manipulable and
controllable” (Dimmock & Walker 1998). The other school of thought according to Dimmock &
Walker treats culture as school is which is the “result of negotiated and shared symbols and
meanings or the product of human actions” (p.563). Dimmock and Walker (1998) take one-step
further to identify significant loopholes in both definitions as: “Neither of the two interpretations
of the organizational culture considers the relationship between the organization and its broader
social environment” (p.563). This brings up two problems in understanding the concept of
27
culture (school/organization). Firstly, it seems that the school culture is seen as limited to the
school boundaries and separate from the wider culture of the society. This could be true to some
extent as each organization has its own culture. However, the members of the organization also
bring their baggage of value and beliefs influenced by wider context. Secondly, people know
what schools are but not what culture is. They treat the idea as a convenient phrase. This seems
to be true as the formation of culture as a product, or as a process depends on actions of and
interaction among the members of the organization and this interaction is not limited to an
organization. Rather the members of the organization also carry baggage of values and beliefs
influenced by wider contexts.
Walker & Dimmock (2002) and Dimmock & Walker (2005) propose six dimensions of
societal culture to help analyze influence at micro (school) level. The first dimension centers on
power relationships that analyzes the extent to which power in a society is distributed through
institutions, or is concentrated in the hands of few. The second dimension revolves around the
concepts of individualism versus collectivism. Societies based on “group oriented” cultures focus
more on relationships and collective needs as opposed to the individual performances in the
“self-oriented” culture. For instance, Pakistani society is more group oriented than individual.
Individual actions may bring shame to the entire family, tribe or group. Thirdly, dimensions of
“Consideration/aggression” focuses on how cultures in societies work to resolve problems.
Conflicts are resolved through assertiveness and exercise of power in “aggression society,”
whereas compromise and negotiation are part of conflict resolution in “consideration societies.”
The fourth dimension views how cultures react to social situations – whether people in
society in general are proactive to change the social condition or they are “fatalistic.”In the later
type, people tend to stick to traditional rules and dogmas in order to avoid uncertainty and risk
28
taking. Next, the“Generative/ Explicative” dimension defines culture in terms of its receptivity or
lack of receptivity to innovations and new ideas. In explicative culture, people tend to adopt
ideas developed elsewhere. The last dimension focuses on “limited relationship/ holistic
relationship.” The limited relationship cultures define roles as fixed/ permanent where as in other
cultures relationships are based on personal considerations and associations, on individuality.
Although analysis of a culture using the above dimensions is interesting, few cultures
are absolute in any one dimension. These dimensions can be interrelated and interactive as one
may lead to generating another. For instance, collectivism may lead to a dimension of
“consideration” in problem resolution. These dimensions are also helpful in analyzing how a
society’s culture leads to complexities in everyday activities for its members, and how these
complexities lead to challenges for principals in schools. Thus, it is noteworthy that schools are
not separate from the larger society, and the society’s cultural influences have significant effects
on professional responsibilities of the principals.
For example, Walker & Hallinger (2007) delineate ways that differentiate principals’
work in the East Asian culture from the principals’ work in the Western culture. They highlight
the junctures created by cultural and contextual realities and external reform demands inspired
by the Western theories and research in education. For instance:
Cultural and institutional context come together to influence the lives of school leaders
through innumerable avenues. These range from their immutable dedication to family,
through policies, methodologies, and theories imported from foreign lands, through
systemic demands for uniformity and accountability, as well as parental cries from
parental cries for creativity and diversity…. The hybrid setting which forms the nexus of
culture and institutional context sees regional principals struggling to determine what is
right, and indeed “what is”, within a life of blurred identity (P.263).
29
Moreover, the way cultural beliefs filter into the school world can be analyzed from this
principal’s quote in Hallinger et al. (2000) cited in Walker & Hallinger 2007).
Sometimes even if we want to involve staff more actively in determining the direction
and procedures for change they misunderstand us. If we really spend a lot of time asking
their opinions, they even begin to think we don’t know how to do our job! It’s as if they
say, “you’re the principal. If you have to ask me, it must mean that you don’t know what
you’re doing (p.269).
Thus, the Asian teachers get uncomfortable when asked for ideas, whereas, American
teachers get uncomfortable when they are not. Dimmock (1998) supports these findings by
citing Hui (1990) “participative leadership is counterproductive in Chinese societies… a
participative superior is seen as indecisive and, therefore, not worthy of respect” (P.372). Hence,
the western theories of effective leadership practices may lead to problems for principals rather
than solving the issues at hand.
Structural/ School Context
The fusion of societal and organizational cultures can be hard to understand because
organizations exist within the wider circle of society and, now, globally. Thus, a “cultural
perspective locates the school as an institution of cultural transmission in an open social system”
(Hallinger 2004, p.70). Walker & Dimmock (2005) postulate that organizations develop their
own cultures and “may be conceived as superimposed on or interactive with the societal culture”
(p. 24). Moreover, each organization will develop its own way of enforcing its values and beliefs
(Johanson, 2005). In this regard, Johansson (2005) cites five climate types in an organization that
are relevant to leadership practices in schools. For example, the instrumental climate tends to
make decisions based on selfish interests. Caring climate, on the other hand, tends to be
empathetic. However, it is pertinent to understand what accounts for selfish or caring motive. A
30
“Law and order” climate tends to focus on professional codes and conducts. Rules climates focus
on policies and procedures developed within an organization. Such a climate seems to be more
authoritative as “rules have a strong existence in the form of institutionalized expectations and
organizational features such as bureaucratic rationality” (Angus, 1994, p. 75). Independent
climates give members wide latitudes to make their own decision.
Walker & Dimmock (2002) drawing upon Hofstede’s (2001) cultural dimensions
explicate five characteristics of organizational culture specific to schools. These dimensions
either focus on people, their professional developments, and welfare, exchange of ideas within
and across organizations, or focus on tasks, rules and regulations. In addition, Dimmock and
Walker (2000) propose eight comparative aspects of the school, which may be helpful in
understanding its basic structure. These include:
- the school’s physical resources;
- financial resources;
- public or private system of schooling;
- the time structures in the form of time tables and academic year;
- human resource and their configurations in terms of students selection;
- teachers;
- separation or integration of guidance/counseling functions with academic functions;
- decision –making structures_ centralized or decentralized.
Walker (2003), raising a question whether organizations are “cultural free or culture
bound,” points to two schools of thought, convergence and divergence. The proponents of
convergence believe that since the organizations are required to be managed in a certain way,
they employ universal strategies to accomplish this. The proponents of divergence believe that
31
organizations are culture bound because “their internal cultures and formal structures reflect their
external environmental cultures” (Walker 2003, p.152). This later concept seems to be fitting to
the context of school because “school, as an institution of cultural transmission…reflects the
predominant values and norms of the larger culture” (Hallinger 2004. P.70).
Hence, organizational cultures differ from each other, yet they reflect the wider cultural
aspects because of the society’s cultural influences on individuals’ beliefs and practices. As such,
Angus(1994) emphasizes: “Schools should be seen as cultural site in which entrenched
expectations and hegemonic understandings act as background rules influencing the actions of
organizational participants” (p. 75). Furthermore, Hanson (1996) postulates that the social
culture influences organizational culture through “human inputs, material inputs, and constraints
in terms of expectations of parents, requirements of law and policy, values and social norms”
(p.113). Hence,
school administrators are not in control of the external systems that play major roles in
the conduct of affairs in their organizations. School administrators rarely write their
conclusions and make their decisions on a clean slate. The choices open to them are all
too confined by decisions made by unseen managers, judges, or bureaucrats in other
places who are applying other priorities (Hanson, 1996, p.115).
Lumby & Fosket (2008) also identify three aspects of the interaction between society
and the school; “cultural input, process and operations within the school, and cultural output”. In
this regard, cultural input consists of societal or external cultural context in which the school is
located, and the culture brought to the school by its members (students, teachers, staff and
parents). Processes within the school revolve around everyday operations, norms, values
behaviors and actions, which reflect cultural messages. Lastly, cultural output refers to the
overall purpose and aims based on two dimensions: the school’s day-to-day interaction with the
32
outside world, and “cultural product” of the school in terms of its graduates. Often the students
who graduate from the school are representatives of their schools in terms of the aspirations,
values and visions they hold about themselves as members of the society, as well as for their
communities.
Principal’s Leadership
The role of school principals has been recognized immensely in the educational
leadership literature because of the responsibilities of allocating resources, assigning
responsibilities to the teachers, dealing with students, parents or community matters and setting
policies for the school. Therefore, principals’ decisions carry ethical implications and if they are
not taken deliberatively, they may lead to serious consequences for others. This brings us to the
ethical aspects of a principal’s leadership, which involves complex dilemmas with uncertain
choices for them. Hence, Beckner (2004) suggests understanding the types of dilemma in order
to be able to make ethical decisions because of “the fact that many aspects of human interactions
are ambiguous- the surrounding circumstances are not clear they may be subject to
interpretations or cultural perspectives, or their meanings may be uncertain” (p.91).
Psycho-moral tensions/ dilemmas
The word dilemma comes from Greek and comprises two words “di means two, and
lemma means a fundamental proposition.” So, ethical dilemmas consist of situations where two
moral values collide (Beckner 2004). The contemporary ethical literature in educational
leadership has been striving to offer frameworks, guidelines and/ or strategies that may help
practicing principals analyze issues in a morally- informed manner as well as for aspiring
principals to see what lies ahead on the roads they want to travel. As ethics gain more focus with
the realization that ethical issues are an integral part of principals’ everyday lives in schools,
33
universities in the United States offer courses to train veteran principals, and prepare aspiring
principals regarding the ethical issues prevalent in schools. Thus, Beckner (2004) suggests the
following types of dilemmas that a principal might encounter.
Truth versus loyalty that refers to the conflict between honestly/integrity and
commitment, responsibility, or promise keeping
Individual versus community that refers to a situation involving “self against others, or a
smaller group against a larger group”
Short-term versus long-term that refers to “needs or desires are contrary to those which
will probably occur in the future”
Justice versus mercy that includes, “law versus love, equity versus compassion, and
fairness versus affection”
Responsibility includes dilemmas of “discretion and accountability”
Role conflicts refer to the situation when an administrator’s multiple roles suggest
different actions”
Conflicts of interest include situation revolving around conflicts between personal and
profession codes of ethics
Defining “best interests” includes situations involving different interests of different
stakeholders or participants in a situation
Dilemmas of policy making revolve around conflict of a policy maker’s perspective of
the public interest and the common interest against what law prescribes
Personal morality includes conflicts between personal, moral standards and social
standards
34
Democracy and obligation_“when executive judgment differs from the majority will of
the people”
Values, beliefs, and ethical decision-making
In the words of Willower & Licata (1997) values are “conceptions of the desirable and
administrators regularly make choices from among competing conceptions of the desirable” (P.1)
and the process of making this choice holds moral implications. They term this process as
“valuation” to refer to the “process of choosing from and implementing conceptions of the
desirable with an awareness of and sensitivity to their potential consequences for a variety of
individuals and groups, as well as multiplicity of values typically affected by implementation”
(p.26). Begley (1999) asserts: “The making of choices is usually termed “decision making” and /
or “problem solving”” (p.240). Willower (1999) proposes “consequence analysis” as part of the
valuation process to identify and recognize the consequences (both positive and negative) and be
able to “head off or mitigate” inadvertent or unforeseen consequences.
Begley (1999) defines values as, “those conceptions of the desirable which motivate
individuals and collective groups to act in particular ways to achieve particular ends” (p.237).
He further identifies three kinds of situation where value conflict arises. Firstly, “nonnegotiable
personal core values of the individual may run counter to professional or organizational
requirements.” Secondly, “value conflicts may also occur as outcomes of interactions among two
or more individuals.” Thirdly, “conflicts occur among the domains of personal values,
professional values, and/ or organizational values” (p.240).
Ryan (1999) postulates, “values are inevitably context-dependent. Social existence is
such that morality is necessarily acknowledged, talked about, and put into practice in particular
situations” (p.89). Hence, values are part of the social fabric so much so that they are practiced
35
unconsciously without noticing how they are influencing decisions. Therefore, Ryan (1999)
further suggests it is necessary for school administrators [principals] to recognize the sometimes
hidden or taken-for-granted values that guide their actions and those of others and which may
have substantial impacts on every one’s lives” (p.90).
Ethics literature (Begley, 2008; Starratt, 1994; Noddings, 1999; Rallies et.al., 2008;
Kowalski, 1991, 1995, 2008; Gray & Smith, 2007) in educational leadership place a particular
emphasis on values and beliefs because they are “social and interactive processes: consequently,
they are culturally influenced” (Dimmock & Walker, 2005, p.12). Identification and
understanding of personal and professional values are paramount in addressing ethical challenges
in a morally informed manner. Leonard (1999) stresses that “examination of educators’ beliefs
about the purpose of education may also reveal much about the level of value consciousness that
educators bring to their decision making” (p. 219). Shapiro and Stefkovich (2011), supporting
the point, argue that this examination will lead to understanding and insight about individuals as
persons and professionals, about what they believe to be “right and wrong, ” the way they make
decisions, and the nature of those decisions.
This implies that school leaders need to be cognizant of societal expectations while
seeking to achieve their own goals (personal/ professional). This will “require an integration of
personal and professional values, their visions of the purpose of schooling, and vision and values
of the key external holders” (Lumby & Fosket, 2008, p. 48). This sounds easier said than done in
a context where principals are held accountable for not following the social values and norms as
Hellman (2001) asserts,
School administrators are people who have devoted years to the study and practice of
delivering an educational program within communities. The day-to-day work of the
principalship is affected by culture, community, politics, power, and gender, factors,
36
which color the meaning that is constructed by individual administrators (P.143).
Begley’s (1999) study in Sweden and Canada highlight the importance of personal values
as they were “found to be significant influences on decision making, rational value types
predominate in the valuation process of school principals, personal preferences are infrequently
articulated, and transrational principles are employed under particular circumstances” (p.251).
On an opposing source, Roche (1999) focuses on catholic school principals’ responding to the
ethical dilemma, postulating, “principals often base their responses on moral and ethical
dilemmas on consequentialist and nonconsequentialist arguments, which reflect the espoused
(explicit) and assumed (implicit) values on which their policies and practice are based” (p.267).
Moreover, ethicists in educational leadership have explored and examined the
relationship between ethics and educational leadership to provide a guided structure as to what to
pursue, and how to pursue in terms of ethical principles, which may help principals address
ethical challenges. Such efforts are critical for leadership practices. Rizvi (1995), for example,
views “the need for conceptual resources” necessary for better understanding of the impact of
ethical principles in principal’s personal and professional lives” (p.96). In this regard, in his work
emphasizing the need for systematic structure in order to build “ethical schools,” Starrat (1994)
presents a framework, which combines “care, justice, and critique” to create a picture of how
each dimension is contingent on and complementary to each other (p.1). Literature does not
provide any fixed sequence of these aspects (Begley 1999) but in my opinion care provides the
basis for making decisions because “…while caring often springs into action when justice has
made a decision, it can also be used to anticipate likely consequences before a decision is made”
(Nodding 1999, p.12).
Nodding (1999) refers to care as a process that takes into consideration how to help
37
people get through their problems. However, in the educational settings, care means systematic
decisions and action that “respond to needs and interest” (Noddings, 1999, p.12). Justice is
referred to “…claims of the institution to serve both the common good and the rights of the
individuals in the school” (Starrat 1994, p.51) which supports the idea “…it is a preferred
relationship between institutions and human beings” (Nodding 1999, p.7). This relationship, in
the educational settings, demands that the school leadership “…reflects dialectically on the
conditions of existence and the structure of power” (Foster 1986, p.32). This, further, leads us to
the concept of critique. Paradoxically, principals need to have control through a hierarchical
structure and yet they must ensure everyone’s participation in decision-making. It is hard to
create that balance because allowing others to participate in decision-making means giving away
power. There is a blurred line between how much power should be shared and how much should
be retained. Therefore, Foster (1986) recommended a “critical approach” for principals to deal
with the “…tensions that arise from their needs to controlling structure and liberating
individuals” (p.32).
Furthermore, expanding on Starrat’s framework of ethical dimensions, Shapiro and
Stefkovich (2011) added a fourth aspect called “ethics of the profession” with a view that as each
profession is required to have ethical boundaries to work in, so does the profession of education.
It is noteworthy that their idea of ethics for the profession goes beyond the regular “mission
statements/ ten commandments” and includes principals’ personal and professional values,
which influence decisions. The ethics of the profession is built on the foundation that if
principal is confronted with a complex situation then the decision should be grounded “in the
best interest of the students.” Hence, Shapiro and Stefkovich (2011) seem to be supporting
Starrat in terms of providing a systematic outline of how we want to “build ethical schools.”
38
This implies that principals should be able to use their discretion to understand the sensitivity of
a situation and make a choice of decision that best satisfies the need. However, applying this to
the Pakistani context may not be as easy as it might be in the context of the United States. The
problem for the Pakistani principals is that they have to work in a framework, which has already
been defined by social norms and cultural practices. The principals have to maneuver within that
framework, which does not leave much room for them to go beyond the framework.
Comparative Understanding of Ethics
Much of the research argues that cultural and contextual realities define and redefine
leadership and its various aspects (Begley & Johansson, 2003; Shah 2006). Ethics is one such
aspect ingrained in cultural and religious contexts. For instance, the word for ethics in Islam is
“Akhlaq,” and this is construed to have the same meaning as morality (Siddiqui 1997).
Nonetheless, Muslim thinkers and philosophers do seem to distinguish between ethics and
morality based on Quranic teachings, such as,
…ethical perspectives are about what guides an individual or a community in choices that
concern the ‘good,’ relating closely to perceptions of who one is and how best to live in
one’s universe. Morals…are specifically about the rules that concern what is right or
wrong, whether for the individual or society” (Sajoo, 2004, p.7).
However, Western thought tends to distinguish between the terms “ethics” and
“morality,” derived from Greek and Latin respectively (Siddiqui 1997). The former examines
“questions of right and wrong, what is humanly good, and why practices are moral or immoral”
and the later “involves the actual process of living out these beliefs” (Stefkovich 2006, p.3).
With slight variation in how ethics and morality are described in the Islamic perspective and
Western schools of thought, the bottom line is that ethics provides a philosophical framework of
morality for practices. Ethics is philosophy (values), and morality encompasses practices
39
(actions). However, it is tough to establish a hard line between what is ethical/unethical and
moral/immoral. For instance, stealing is unethical and immoral. However, what if the person
steals because his/her child is dying of hunger and there is no choice but to steal? The action may
well be considered immoral when stealing is wrong, but ethically it could be right because the
person stole to save his child’s life.
Moreover, the use of intellect and rationale are considered pivotal in achieving harmony
in ethics and morality in Western as well as Islamic ethics. For instance, for the earlier Muslim
philosophers’ (Al-farabi, Ibn-Sina, Ibne-Rushd) use of intellect and rationale was a source of
getting to the theoretical knowledge of ethics that guided their practices in a way that contributed
in “furthering the ultimate goals [happiness] of individuals and community” (Nanji 2006, p.7).
In addition, ethical concepts of humanity, equity/equality, justice, care, accountability,
human rights, freedom, respect, individual/ social responsibility, reflection, and inquiry,
presented in the Western literature particularly in educational leadership, are not new to the
Islamic ethics (Sajoo 2004, Nanji, 2006, Jamal 2008,). These concepts were part of practices of
Muslim philosophers in the past, because “the central emphasis of Islam’s ethical ideal is
enablement of each person to live up to his exalted status as vicegerent of God on earth…”(Sajoo
2004, p. 99). It implies that the human is the center of the whole universe and is entrusted with
the capabilities of reflection and inquiry.
Furthermore, according to Islamic ethics, there is no dichotomy between spiritual and
worldly life because “service of God is not only worship but also service to humanity and
abiding by the duty of trust towards the rest of creation” (Sajoo 2004, p. 100). There is also an
“…emphasis on equality and justice in Islam [that] aims at inclusion and embracing diversity”
(Shah 2006, p.376) because according to the Holy Quran, humanity was created from a single
40
soul and was divided into tribes and communities so that people recognize each other and strive
for mutual goodness (Nanji,2006, Jamal, 2008, Sajoo 2004). Hence, synthesizing the importance
of developing a comparative understanding of religions and their ethics, Beckner (2004)
postulates
even a cursory understanding of moral and ethical thinking from leading religions of the
world today will help us to better understand, recognize, and benefit from what human
beings through the ages have understood being the guiding principles from religion for
application to daily life (P.18).
This implies that a critical understanding of ethics at various levels may benefit
principals’ leadership practices in their schools. This is important because often the theoretical
teachings are interpreted through a cultural lens, and most often, culture takes precedence over
religion or religious teachings. For example, the religion Islam lays an emphasis on equality of
men and women for education, heredity and so forth. However, cultural practices in the Muslim
societies do not conform to this teaching: rather, they follow a tribal practice of limiting
women’s status and roles than men.
Section II
High School Principals’ Responsibilities in Pakistan and United States: Review of
Prior Studies
Apart from reviewing literature to develop a theoretical understanding of the relationship
between culture, ethics and educational leadership, I also reviewed prior studies to explore how
high school principals’ roles are similar or different in Pakistan and the United States. The
following sub questions guided my review of the empirical studies.
What responsibilities do high school principals carry out in Pakistan and United
States?
41
What challenges (if any) do they face in carrying out their responsibilities?
How do the principals address these challenges?
Details of the methodology are provided in the chapter (4) on research methods. In this
section, I provide answers to the above questions in light of the review of prior studies
High School Principals’ Responsibilities in Pakistan
School Context
Almost all studies reviewed about school principals in Pakistan focused either on
comparing head teachers in government and on-government systems or solely government or
private school principals. Hence, school context refers to whether the school is part of a private
or public system. The theme sheds light on factors leading to differences in principals’ decision-
making and constraints they face while exerting their responsibilities.
The studies also revealed that schools’ contexts in Pakistan differ in many ways, and so
do their heads’ responsibilities. Firstly, the government / public system offers single sex schools
for boys and girls and school head teachers are male and female respectively. Secondly, my
review also revealed that the government school heads had a “flat structure” where she/he is
responsible for all the operations within the school, whereas private schools had a structure with
deputy heads and middle management.
Thirdly, a difference also lies in the principals’ inductive processes at private and public
school contexts. The promotion for headship in the government is based on seniority, which
often takes into account “length of service rather than personal disposition and willingness of
individual” (Khan 2011). Memon (2001) supports this finding as “head teacher’s induction takes
place through promotion on the seniority-cum-merit basis from among the senior teachers who
may be excellent teachers but not necessarily good head teachers” (p. 239). However, the school
42
heads in the non-governmental sector are hired either through formal screening by the school
administration, open competition or based on work experiences as deputy heads (Simkins et al.
1998, 2010, Khan 2011).
Lastly, the studies also revealed various elements, which constitute school contexts and
the ways principals enact their responsibilities. In this regard, Simkins et al (1998) identified
three dimensions to the school context, which may lead to demands and constraints for the
school principals. The student body constitutes the first dimension of the school system, i.e.
whether girls or boys school. Each school has its own disciplinary issues. Nevertheless, none of
the head teachers in the study spent more than 5 percent of their time on interaction with
students. The nature of the community in which the school is located constitutes the second
dimension of the school system. Private school heads were found to have spent more time with
parents and community as compared to the government school heads. Parents constitute the third
dimension of the school system. The study, however, found that the parents were less
problematic once their children were admitted in either type of schools. Nonetheless, the school
heads were found to have differing perceptions about the involvement of parents in the school
matters. As one government school head in the study put it, “the parents have their vested
interests and they want to politicize the school environment, and as a head of school, it is
eventually problematic for me” (Simkins et.al, p.141).
Moreover, these differences in systems lead to how power/ authority is vested in the
school heads. For instance, the secondary school heads in the government system perceive
themselves “only as a chowkidar [doorman].” Khan (2011) studied the “instructional
management of a private and government secondary school principal in Northern Pakistan” and
found stark differences in the way the principals in the private and the public secondary schools
43
supervised teachers as well as having oversight of instructional activities. For instance, the
school principals of the private school carried out the supervisory activities by “taking frequent
substitute classes, visiting classes, getting students’ feedback about the teaching methodologies
of their teachers” (p.5). The government head teacher, as in the words of one respondent in Khan
(2011), “…operated the school in a traditional way that did not meet the needs of more modern
educational systems” (P.6). The government head either avoided classroom visits or had
extremely limited visits with a purpose of ensuring the presence of teachers and discipline in the
classrooms. However, lack of availability of quality teachers was a huge concern for principals in
both systems. The non-government head teachers had somewhat significant powers to recruit
teachers as compared to the government head teachers. The government head teachers were
powerless in firing poorly performing teachers. As in the words of one respondent, “I am not
entitled to send someone to attend a professional development activity: instead, the department
of education has the responsibility to arrange a session and identify potential trainees. I even
cannot recommend someone for particular trainings” (p. 6).
Curriculum development/ enrichment was another vital area, which revealed a difference
in the way the principals in both systems were engaged in at school. The private and public
schools have to follow the government’s curriculum. However, the private school principal had
the freedom to maneuver to make it more students’ needs oriented. The government head teacher
asserted:“I do not have any role in curriculum development or enrichment. We are provided
specific curricula by the state, and we have to follow this curriculum. Neither the teacher nor the
principal is allowed to digress from this curricula” (Khan 2011, p.7). Likewise, the study by
Simkins et al. (1998) revealed that in the government schools “either no attempt was made to
adapt the curriculum to the needs of the school or those attempts failed.” (p.139).
44
The accountability aspects of the principals’ responsibilities also pose a difference in
public and private schools. For example, the “bureaucratic system of civil service” characterizes
the school operations in the government sector and “boards of trustees” oversee the schools in
non-government sectors (Simkins et al. 1998). Non-government schools have various school
management boards as their governing bodies. The studies by Simkin et al’(2001), Shifa (2010),
Khan (2011) revealed a communication gap between the higher ups and school leaders in the
public system. However, less personal contact and communication lead principals to be more
vulnerable to higher authority’s negative decisions because there is a lack of dialogue and
understanding on the part of the high ups. As such, “in our system, the teachers are not fired; the
head master is fired for everything. I see my role as accountant, rather than administrator or
academic” (Simkins et.al. 2001, p.140). Respondent’s remarks in one of the reviewed studies
highlighted the vulnerability of principal in the public system, as he asserted,
I asked him [principal] to take up the issue of the school library with the higher
authorities, but he did not pay any attention to my suggestion. He has no guts to express
his point of view before the higher authority (Khan 2011, p.8).
Hence, the power of hierarchy and bureaucracy hampers principals’ abilities even to talk
about their school’s needs, one principal asserted:
we must get help from the higher authority, this is one thing, which can encourage us,
but that encouragement is not there… not appreciation is there from any side and if I am
doing something for the betterment of my students nobody will consider it a good thing
(Simkins et.al 2003, p.286).
Findings reveal challenges to principals at the teacher level as well, as they asserted,
“teachers do not take professional development positively. They think that I am wasting my time.
They are saying that I want to show myself as better than them[sic]” (p.287). The government
head teachers particularly complained about their “inability to appoint or reward teachers, the
45
teachers’ unwillingness to work outside standard hours, shortages of teaching staff, and other
resources” (p.287). Furthermore, a principal’s comments about the teachers’ behavior and his
limited authority to exert power over their activities, shed light on a host of challenges for the
principals in government schools. He asserted, “These teachers have turned the school into a
hotel; they come to school whenever they like, and they leave the school whenever they like”
(Khan 2011, p.8). In addition, pointing to a lack of accountability mechanisms in government
schools, he identified the problem with the “Annual Confidential Report” (ACR), “No action is
taken on the basis of these ACRs… if the performance of students is not good, the teachers only
get an explanation, but not a reprimand. The climate is not suitable for taking actions” (Khan
2011, p.8).
Socio-Cultural/ Religious Practices
My review of studies also highlighted a close connection between principals’
responsibilities and socio-cultural practices. An important finding of the review was the
leadership style adopted by all the heads. For instance, principals in Simkins et al. (1998, 2001,
and 2003) tried to practice more democratic leadership approaches, but the social expectation
from a leader to behave in a certain way led to pressures on heads who wanted to adopt “soft
approach.” Statements such as these, “Did you fire anybody when you went there? Why do not
you hit the child? If he is not behaving, hit him,” imply that it is a norm and expectation from the
principal to be authoritative in maintaining control over and discipline of others who are inferior
in position. In a context like this, if a principal wants to convey a democratic attitude, that would
be considered the principals’ weakness or incompetence.
Moreover, as a conservative society, religio-moral values also control individual/ social
norms and practices in Pakistan. Gender segregation constitutes the basic layout of the entire
46
society and determines how gender roles are placed in public and private domains (Shah 2010).
Hence, the role of gender and gendered leadership practices came out strongly. For example,
Shah (2010) conducted a study that highlighted how cultural and belief systems in Pakistani
society inform the cultural practices of leadership for men and women, creating a strong
influence on dimensions of gender, thus creating unique “moral discords” for female heads. As
such, a respondent in this study revealed
My in-laws have asked my husband to get a particular candidate appointed. My dilemma
is that the person does not qualify…if I get her appointed it is professionally incorrect
and if I don’t get her appointed then my family life will be misery…you know, my
husband being told that his wife does not listen to him (p.35).
Another respondent in the same study asserted,
I am a wife and mother first. The Quran says that it is my first responsibility to look after
my family. I accept that, but at times it stretches me to the limit! Even when I have
to work late in the office, I cannot miss any of my domestic duties_ I am a woman (Shah,
p.34).
Yet another respondent presented this dilemma,
I am planning to give up the principalship. Government is transferring me to another
town, and my husband and in-laws don’t agree with the move. It will affect our children,
also. My father in-law is old and I have to look after him as well. The in-laws and even
other relatives would criticize the fact that I am after a career and do not care for family
responsibilities. Family comes first_ how can I choose to continue. (p.34).
These findings are insightful and enlightening about women’s leadership practices, and
struggle to create a balance in their private and public domains.
Moral codes are another domain where women leaders, in particular, have to conform to
societal and religious norms to maintain the izzat of their families. For instance, one of the
respondents asserted,
We and our girls are responsible for family izzat. A breath of scandal and that not only
ruins your professional future and career but also upsets family life__ even destroys it.
That is a stigma, and a woman with this stigma get sidelined in the professional field as
47
well. You become excluded__ at home and in the profession. Better play it safe__ keep
your head bowed and protect your izzat (p.38).
The pressure of maintaining “izzat” limits even the professional communication, as one principal
in the study asserted:
Being a woman principal, I occasionally do face problems. Then I talk to the concerned
male personnel on the phone. If the problem is not solved, I have to make a second call;
but there would be hijab (hesitation) this time. I find it a bit difficult to talk to men on the
phone…. I intentionally try to avoid the situation (p.39).
Yet for another principal staying close to family was important because:
Staying close to family protects you from social victimization. You know how difficult
it is for women to work in positions like this. You have to communicate with men and
influential people. And what our society is like! Having a strong family helps_ people are
careful in talking about you, and listen to what you have got to say even though you are a
woman (p.36).
The above responses help us peek into the world of professional women who hold leadership
positions, and how they are tied with their primary responsibilities defined by religious and
cultural interpretations.
Community issues such as “sectarian rivalries, conflicts and clashes and in certain cases
armed confrontations, between two individuals (e.g., two students fighting in the school) or
groups of people (e.g., in the wider society), arising from different religious orientations” (Shifa,
2010, p.92) lead to immense pressures for the principals in the government system. These
tensions “… are deeply rooted in people’s everyday lives and can easily stir their sentiments”
(p.93) and if these erupt they may “not only affect the school’s interpersonal relationships but
also disrupt the running of the school” (p.93).
Moreover, religion plays a crucial part in defining principals’ role in students’ life, as
well as in the society. Schools expect the students to develop a certain moral conduct according
to their religious and cultural norms. Therefore, the principals focus on developing students’
48
personalities in the light of social expectations using different strategies (Shafa 2010, Khaki
2010, Gulab 2010). For instance, one of the students asserted, “If we don’t learn manners, then
what the use of education is?” Gulab (2010) referred to the role of principals as a “moral
authority” who could “reprimand them anytime they make[sic] mistakes” (Gulab 2010).
Furthermore, Khaki (2010), summarizing the role of principals in his study, states:
the three heads have, on the one side a moral and religious role (Prophetic), and on the
other, a temporal, secular one (professional). Their personal convictions and inspirations,
as well as their stakeholder’s expectations, see their effectiveness in terms of imparting
Islamic values in a way that gives their students a balanced or integrated combination of
both traditional (religious) and modern (Western) education (p.118).
Thus, the principals in studies by Khaki (2010), Shafa (2010) Gulab (2010) used
strategies such as assembly, morning talks, extra textbooks about Islam, teachings of prophet
(Hadith) so that the students are “able to spend their lives following the guidelines given by
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)” (Gulab 2010, p.139).
Principals’ Strategies to address Challenges
Despite limited authority and discretion for decisions, principals in the studies used different
strategies to overcome challenges within and outside the schools. Most of the strategies seem to
revolve around how to carry out day-to-day operations smoothly. For instance, developing
respectful relationships with the staff seemed to be a concept that cut across almost all studies.
Principals in almost all the schools used these (relationships) as a strategy to create a harmonious
school. For instance, a principal in Shifa’s (2010) study asserted,
Whenever there is a good reason, we come here from the school and dine together….
We are always on the lookout for occasions to celebrate, and when someone on our staff
gets married, has a baby, passes an examination, or get a promotion, we come here to
celebrate (p.94).
49
One of the principals in the governmental system, in Khaki’s (2010) study, focused “on
assigning responsibilities inside the school through establishing committees to create successor”
(p.116). Khan et al (2009) found more responses that are positive from teachers for “capabilities
of interpersonal relationship” and least positive for “instructional behavior” of their heads at
secondary schools.
In addition, the studies revealed that the women heads had transformed the “site” into
family, as one respondent talked about her institution as a family, and “the head has to manage
the same way as a family head, treating each one according to one’s positioning” (p.35). As a
respondent explains it, “we are like a family. When there are problems, we discuss them within
the family. I have suggested a theory to my staff: when a student comes to you, treat her as your
own child and deal accordingly” (p. 35). This finding supports Simkins’ study, where the female
principal expressed, “my door is never shut, and the children are always welcome to come…. I
am mother, sister, aunt” (p.140). A quantitative study by Khan et al. (2009) further supports
these findings where the female heads were found to be better at interpersonal skills (one of the
performance indicators in their study) as compared to their male counterparts. Bhattacharjea
(1994) cited similar findings in which
…female administrators [leaders] appear to perform tasks in ways that enable them to
maintain harmony between their roles as women, in a society where norms governing
female behavior are explicitly prescribed, and their roles as officers within a bureaucracy.
A primary strategy that they appear to use to achieve this goal is to replicate social norms
for appropriate behavior within their work environment, interacting with their colleagues
in ways that parallel their interactions in a domestic setting and thus blurring the
distinction between ‘public’ and ‘private’ (p.11)
.
As such, female heads were considered better at “instructional behaviors, capabilities of the
interpersonal relationships, professional attitudes and managerial abilities” as compared to their
male counterparts in a study conducted by Khan et al. (2009). Female head teachers were also
50
regarded positively in terms of discussing students’ problems with staff and having open
discussions and meetings.
High School Principals’ Responsibilities in the United States
Involvement in School Affairs
Concepts such as instructional leadership, distributed leadership, transformational
leadership, and pedagogical leadership appeared to be running through most of the studies
reviewed for this exercise. Hence, principals’ involvements in instructional and administrative
affairs emerged as one of the most noticeable themes.
Empirical studies highlighted the importance vested in the principals’ roles in the United
States. As such, the principals play a vital part in the curriculum and instructional activities by
providing student instruction, reviewing student classroom work, reviewing lesson plans,
reviewing instructional material, textbooks, planning curricula, discussing teaching
practices/curricula, observing classroom instruction, modeling a lesson,
planning/implementing professional development, reviewing data,
preparing/implementing standardized tests (Spillane 2007,p.107).
The findings by Spillane (2007) also revealed that principals spent 55.2 % of time either
leading instructional and curriculum activities alone or co-leading with other professionals such
as classroom teachers, other professional staff, subject area specialists, teacher leaders, and
assistant principals (p.113). Moreover, the findings by Horng et. al. (2010) based on a single
day’s observation reveal that principals
spent only a little over 10 percent of the day on instruction- related tasks, roughly equally
split between tasks related to day-to-day instruction, such as conducting classroom
observations, and those related to the broader instructional program, like implementing
professional development for teachers (p.5190).
The principals played a decisive role in improving teaching and learning environment in
the school by “creating positive school cultures and supporting teachers’ professional and (often)
51
personal developments by actively responded [sic] to their constituents’ needs on a daily basis”
(Jacobson, 2005, p.613). The principals in Jacobson’s (2005) study promoted a learning
environment by “de-privatizing practices, modeling and mentoring and collaborative structures”
(p.616).
According to Spillane et.al. (2007) principals also spent 63.4% of their time in
performing administrative duties including “managing budget resources, personnel, scheduling,
the campus, students, and engaging school improvement planning” (p. 107). These findings are
supported by Horng et. al. (2010) who found, based on a single day’s observation, that the
administrative activities captured 30 percent of the school day including management issues like
as student discipline and fulfilling compliance requirements. The principals spent “over a fifth of
the day” on organizational management tasks including, managing budgets and staff, and hiring
personnel. However, there is no real consensus among researchers regarding how principals
spend their time.
Moreover, principals’ roles are central and of the utmost importance to hiring qualified
teachers (Rutledge 2010, Kersten 2008). Kersten‘s study (2008) revealed that 57.9%
responsibility for the hiring decisions lay with the principals. However, “in more than 40 % of
the searches, someone other than the principal either selects the teacher or shares in the
employment decision” (p. 363). For this purpose, principals’ recruitment strategies involve
seeking information from various agencies to search for the best quality teachers. Crum and
Sherman (2008) support these findings when they cite a principal in their study who says:
I take the position that the most important part of the process is the hiring process. I think
it is very important that when you sit down with a candidate for a position that you a)
make sure they are confident and B) that they fit into your community, into your school,
and into your culture of your school…] if you’re not hiring people who can relate to their
skills and can’t live with the traditions that we have in the building, then you’re just
52
spinning your wheels. I think the hiring process is extremely important (p.568).
This shows that principals gave ample time and thorough preparations to hiring the
qualified and skilled teachers. It also shows options available for principals from the teacher
pool.
Challenges for High School Principals
Performance Standards
My review of the empirical studies also highlighted a host of challenges that principals in
the US schools experience. These challenges primarily emanate from accountability structures
that place enormous emphasis on mandates such as No Child Left Behind and state performance
standards. These policies lead to a great amount of pressure for principals as Marks and Printy
(2003) shared their findings:
Principals felt pressure to be accountable for school improvement and the achievement of
students. Dealing with accountability in the context of systemic change, principals also
had to face the implications of the standards movement, curriculum frameworks, and new
forms of assessment (p.391).
However, according to Jacobson et al (2005) the principals made use of accountability
standards in improving teaching and learning. For instance, one of the principals in the study
asserted “…if they [teachers] had any problem with the goals, they may need to consider going
somewhere else because that was going to be my direction and my commitment to this
community” (p.613). Although accountability standards created an opportunity to set the
directions for improving teaching and learning for principals in their schools, principals also
found it “morally wrong” to disregard individual’s learning needs in the name of uniform
standards. For instance, a principal in Frick (2009) asserted,
Everyone should be 100 percent proficient. I think that’s an admirable goal to set, but I
think that’s where the issue comes in with morality: judging every kid at that same
53
standard. What is 100 percent for you may be a different 100 percent for me. It sort of
becomes that sliding scale with all those other factors that come into play in everybody’s
lives _ to expect everyone to be at the same spot, I think that is morally wrong (p.60).
Moreover, responding to the pressures from AYP provisions and Florida’s A+ accountability
policy, one of the principals asserted,
Testing is driving [school improvement]. Anybody that says it’s not, I mean, they’re not
being truthful. I mean, it is driving everything. That train is going down the track and you
are not going to stop it….You know what the rules are. Just go out and do it (Rutledge,
2010, p.229).
Another high school principal in a non-Title1 school articulated the pressures to hire quality
teachers, “I’m looking for really good people, and we don’t have the luxury of having people in
the classroom who aren’t. I mean, there’s pressure” (p.230).
Hiring Teachers
As mentioned earlier, the sole responsibility of hiring a teacher often lies with the
principals in the United States. In this regard, Rutledge, Harris, & Ingle (2010) identify two main
tensions that principals have to face in hiring teachers. The tensions spring from federal, state
and district policies of performance standards. For instance, the district policies of “Hiring
Quality Teacher” (HQT) to meet the demands of “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) require that
qualified and quality teachers should be given preference. However, at the district level,
principals are expected to address local needs by ensuring racially-balanced teacher populations
in their schools. Principals being in the center of hiring practices have to ensure that their
decisions are racially balanced, a challenge explained by a participant (principal) in Rutledge
(2010);
I’ve got about [under 30 percent] black kids in this school, and they are outnumbered.
I’ve got to make sure that I have some people on this campus that they can go to… Plus,
the superintendent wants it that way too. I do all I can to hire minorities into my faculty
(p.227).
54
Zero Tolerance Policy
These policies have been implemented in many U.S. schools to deal with the problems of
drugs and weapon possession and their uses. Such policies function on the basis of “the rule is
the rule” (Stefkovich 2006, p.96): that is, that everyone must be treated equally and without
discrimination under the rule. However, there is disagreement over zero tolerance
implementation as it has been reported and perceived to be carried out in petty, prejudicial, or
absurd fashions, thus having a negative impact on minority students, or the general
administration of justice and discipline within the school. Hence, principals face situations that
create a “moral discord,” as one principal describes his dilemma:
…this is what I struggle with sometimes about the people above me, and I understand
their plight because they have to be accountable too. You could take the hard line… and
you talk about the ethical part of that, that’s a part that I constantly come back to that
does get me in trouble sometimes with those above me. I can’t tell you what that line in
the sand is…. So there’s a place, and if I get taken to task on it, I’d be in a ringer _ point
black…. Do I feel like I made bad decisions, no, because my guiding principle was what
was best for that kid (Frick 2009, p.61).
Another principal expressed:
We talk about kids walking the street or coming to school with freaking box cutters and
guns; but the reality is, basically, the school is a reflection of the community. Now we
have the zero tolerance or the parameters that we‘re not going to accept this from you…
and for some people, we have to deal with them accordingly. But many of the things we
see happening out there [neighborhoods] are going on in here [school], and I am thinking
we’re hard on [the kids] for bringing this stuff in the schools. What about the
community? They’re still carrying it! (p.62).
The irony of the school rules is that they seem to be disconnected from what happens in
the society or community where students spend most of their time.
Principals’ Strategies to Address Issues/Constraints
When it comes to addressing moral dilemmas, often the principals feel torn between the
55
school policies and their personal/ professional values and beliefs before they step up to resolve
the tensions. For instance, one principal’s account highlights such a tension:
I expelled a young man. I knew a lot about him _ his molestation, unsettled family
background, and many personal and life challenges. The kid had a laminated marijuana
leaf in his pocket. I was torn personally. The leaf tested positive. I did not want to see
him expelled, that’s what the rule said…. I wanted to fix the situation in my own
counseling way versus applying a consequence. I look at both sides a lot _ it’s difficult…
I felt the [moral] discrepancy… when a situation arises, personal beliefs arise. I wound up
suspending the student…. (Frick 2009, p.63).
Concluding his study findings, Frick (2009) summarizes the strategies that the principals in his
study used to resolve ethical issues
Adhering to one’s gut instinct or personal sense of right; leaping (choosing) in
uncertainty about one’s interpretation of gray options, following organizational
expectations and then consciously separating oneself as a person from positional duty or
work role, rationalizing by gathering information, brainstorming with others and
following past experience, or following a personal policy, principal or maxim that guides
one’s conduct (p.64).
Principals were also found to confront issues of “race and gender” when hiring teachers.
The bottom line is that principals have to “bridge and buffer” by adhering to “federal and state
mandates, while also modifying and extending the policies to meet local goals” (Rutledge et.al.
2010, p.2008). No matter what instructional, democratic and transformational roles principals
play, the buck stops with the principals as “[…] bones of the operation. They know that I am in
charge of the instruction and I make that very clear.” Another principal asserted, “I work with
each team and unit, as do the assistant principals. I guess it is a hierarchy. I have my hands on
everything. Everything goes through me. It just works that way” (Cum and Sherman 2008,
p.571).
56
Section III
Comparative Analysis of High School Principals’ Responsibilities: Highlights from
the Review of Prior Studies
The following table presents a summary of the synthesis of highlights from the review of prior
studies followed by a detailed discussion.
Table1: Similarities and Differences in Principals’ Responsibilites in Pakistan and United States
Similarities Pakistan United States
Dealing with students - -
Dealing with Community
Supervision of the School
-
-
-
-
Differences
Education system
Curriculum
School System
Principal Induction
Role of Principal as leader
Performance Standards
Students Body
Accountability
Role of Religion
Pakistan
Centralized
Federal Ministry
Verity of systems
Seniority
Not clearly defined
Annual exams/ test
scores
Multiethnic
Bureaucratic system of
civil services/ board of
trustees
Sex segregated schools
Gendered leadership
practices
religious education
United States
Decentralized
States/ Districts
Mainly public
Qualified, certified
Central Role
Federal/ State/ District
mandates
Multicultural
Performance standards
Separation in religion
and state
57
Structural Contexts: Similarities & Contrasts
There is a vast difference between the socio-cultural and structural contexts in which
principals in Pakistan and Untied States work. However, there are similarities in their work as
they, in both countries, have to deal with the students’ needs, work with the teachers and for
teachers to improve teaching learning. For this, they strive to create a harmonious and caring
environment at their schools in one way or the other. For instance, one of the principals in Khaki
(2010) asserted, “I have developed a team of teachers where they are leaders. I have already
made the school a ‘leaderful’ school; I can see that” (p.112). This assertion resonates with an
American principal’s assertion: “I am a firm believer in growing your staff. People know that
they have opportunities to move into leadership positions […] I think you need to give people
opportunities” (Crum and Sherman 2008, p.569).
Parents of the students constitute the pressure for the principals in both Pakistan and the
United States. Principals in both contexts have to deal with parents in one way or the other.
Moreover, the principals are responsible for dealing with the communities in which their schools
are located. What happens in the community has a direct influence on what happens within the
schools. Lastly, and most importantly, supervision of the entire school is in the hands of the
principal. Principals have to be responsible for what goes on in the school even in an extremely
bureaucratic system such as in Pakistan. However, limited discretion to make decisions at the
school level makes it hard for principals to assume ethical decisions on their own. They have to
take the authorities above them into confidence and fulfill the bureaucratic processes, which
brings us to the contrasts in structural contexts that are explained below.
58
Education
There is an enormous difference in the way education systems work in Pakistan and
United States. Pakistan has a highly centralized system with a federal education minister on the
top who plans and monitors education in the country. Implementation is the responsibility of the
Provincial Education Department, the District governments and NGO’s (Oduro et.al.2007, Farah
& Rizvi 2007, Rizvi 2008). Moreover, a Curriculum Wing (CW) in the education ministry
performs the task of writing curricula for the whole country and deviation from it yields serious
consequences. Opposing this, the constitution has placed the responsibility of education upon the
states in the United States. As such, “each of the 50 states maintains primary authority for the
education of the school-age population within its jurisdiction, and as such, educational
governance in the US should be viewed as 50 relatively similar, but autonomous systems”
(Jacobson et.al. 2005, p.608). Consequently, the states have the freedom to plan and implement
curriculum according to their needs and requirements. Nonetheless, a binding factor seems to be
the federal policy NCLB that guides performance standards for each state, their districts and
schools across the country.
School System:
Due to dissatisfaction with the public education system there are several parallel systems
operating in Pakistan. These systems include private, community-based and madrassa (religious
schools). Each system addresses the needs of its community. However, public school systems
appear to be the strongest medium of imparting education in the United States for which states
employ all available resources in the country.
Principals’ Induction Process:
Due to a great emphasis on the role of principal in school improvement and better
59
academic achievements in the United States, principalship here is based on educational
qualifications, professional trainings and experiences. However, the career path for headship in
schools, especially public schools in Pakistan, is based on a simple principle of seniority that
accounts for the number of years spent in teaching. There is no mechanized system to orient the
principals with their roles as leaders. Large private schools do prefer to have principals who are
qualified, professionally trained, and experienced.
Principals’ Engagement in School Affairs:
The role of principals in school affairs, especially the public, seems to be extremely
limited in Pakistan. Either school principals are not clear about their roles or they simply view
themselves as “chowkidar [doorman]” (Simkins et.al. 1998). Bureaucracy limits their powers and
they have no voice in hiring or firing teachers. Consequently, either the principals do not take
initiatives to improve teaching and learning environment (Khan 2010) or they face extreme
hurdles in daring to take initiatives (Shifa 2010). Principals play pivotal and significant central
roles in school affairs in the United States, by planning instructional, administrative activities
and hiring teachers.
Accountability measures:
Pakistan, accountability means the principals are answerable to the “bureaucratic system
of civil services” in public schools and board of trustees in private schools. This accountability
also means that the principals need to take their higher ups into confidence before they take any
initiatives to improve teaching learning, hiring or firing staff, and addressing budget issues.
Principals’ accountabilities in the United States lie to the performance standards in the form of
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Annual Yearly Progress (AYP).
Performance standards depend on test scores in Pakistan, based on annual examination
60
system. Although, test scores are the main determinants of performance in schools, in United
States as well, federal, district and school policies have been placed to improve these test scores.
Policies such as NCLB and AYP drive the school policies to ensure improvement in scores as
well as principals’ discretion to improving teaching and learning in schools.
Contrast: Socio-Cultural Contexts
There is a startling contrast in the socio-cultural context in both countries, which
contributes to the uniqueness of principals’ responsibilities and the way of exerting these. In the
context of Pakistan, the religious standards and cultural beliefs define parameters for practices
that also filter through schools and influence educational/leadership practices. For instance,
gender segregation is an essential element of Pakistani society, which leads to gender-segregated
schools especially in the public system further leading to gender specific practices. Moreover,
principals have to ensure the student’s character building in light of the religious obligations and
expectations. For this purpose, they take implicit and explicit measures to make religion and
religious education part of students’ learning.
On the contrary, the separation between religions and states has unique influence on
practices in the United States. The role of religion is limited to private lives, and it is not an
imposition on the masses. When it comes to making decisions at the school level, the principals
look at the situational context rather than religious obligations.
An interesting contrast can be made in terms of zero tolerance policy in the United States.
The principals in the United States often have to juggle whether to strictly follow policy or make
decisions that take into account the situational needs. In many cases, principals may use their
discretion to make decisions “in the best interest of the students.” However, in the context of
Pakistan, the socio-cultural norms pose zero tolerance for any deviation.
61
Hence, in Pakistan the ethical leadership takes a different form at many levels, with deep
implications for leadership practices. It affects women principals differently from their male
counterparts. The very fact that the schools are gender-segregated and so are the principals,
create the framework of ethical leadership for principals.
For instance, for women, the biggest moral dilemma is creating a balance between their
personal and professional lives, more importantly a balance between their womanhood (muslim)
and profession. The religio-moral norms of creating a distance between genders transfer to their
work environments. No matter how highly educated and professional a woman is, she has to
function in boundaries imposed by society. Hence, the concept of ethics or morals revolves
around how successfully the women maintain the “izzat” of their own but also of their girl
students. However, in the United States, one may observe that there is a separation between
personal and professional lives for men and women principals.
In a nutshell, the literature and especially the review of prior studies, highlight
differences between Pakistani society and the Western world and makes the ethical dilemmas for
principals comprehensible to a western reader. The chapter also points to the fact that using a
yardstick to study ethics and theory of ethical dilemmas, which was developed and validated in
Western scholarship may not illuminate the rest of the world, particularly Pakistan where codes
of conduct are different. Therefore, if ethical challenges are framed by cultural, contextual and
historical practices, then the questions that persist are: how can we examine them? What
accounts for the divergences? What theoretical frameworks can explain the complexity of socio-
cultural systems that interact with educational institutions to produce ethics of judging the
conduct of schooling? How do school principals navigate this complex terrain to make ethical
decisions in the school environment? What moral, ethical or contradictory challenges do they
62
experience in their profession and position of leadership?
Hence, in order to understand the socio-cultural and structural contexts and appreciate
ethical challenges to principals in Pakistan, and ways in which they address these challenges, I
attempted to investigate school principals’ experiences in the context of Pakistan. The next
chapter details the research strategies I employed for collecting my data.
63
Chapter 4
Methodology
Re statement of the Research Problem
Principals in Pakistan and United States are faced with highly complex challenges while
enacting their professional responsibilities in schools. However, socio-cultural and structural
contexts pose difference in how they go about resolving complex ethical issues. Therefore, using
a framework tested and validated in a Western context may not be applicable in a context like
Pakistan, where historical practices play a crucial role in influencing principals’ decisions.
Hence, taking a comparative stance to look at aspects of “convergence” and “divergence” in the
context, this study aimed at explaining socio-cultural and structural forces that shape principals’
ethical decision in Pakistan and United States.
Research Strategy
Qualitative paradigms seemed best suited for this study for two reasons. Firstly, the focus
of the qualitative approach is on “broad analysis of an entire phenomenon or context” in which
the research study explores the relationship between the phenomenon understudy and the
context. Secondly, the questions in qualitative paradigms seek “exploration, explanation,
description, and illustration” (Drew et.al 2008, p.185). As such, the purpose of the questions was
to explain the phenomenon of “ethical decision making” in light of socio-cultural and structural
contexts and to identify challenges in implementing their decisions. The questions were:
What are the socio-cultural contexts that shape the meaning and practice of ethical
decision making among secondary school principals in Pakistan and United
States?
64
How do structural contexts influence ethical decision of high school principals in
Pakistan and United States?
What challenges do they experience in implementing those decisions in Pakistan
and the United States?
Sample
Selecting an appropriate sample that energizes the purpose of the study is a fundamental
part of any research study. There are different strategies to select samples depending on the genre
of research paradigm. As such the “qualitative interview studies generally begin with decisions
regarding the sample to interview….” (Weiss, 1994, p.14). According to Mcmillan (2000) “the
participants in a phenomenological study are selected because they have lived the experiences
being investigated, are willing to share their thoughts about the experiences, and can articulate
their conscience experiences” (p.269). Since, the number of subjects necessary depends on the
purpose of a study” (Kvale 2007, p.43), participants are selected purposefully (Creswell 2003).
In this regard, the five principals in this study were selected from schools in Northern
Areas of Pakistan, who fulfilled these:
They represented secondary schools, and
They would provide variations in the study’s sample that include one all-girls school, one
all-boys, one co-educational, and one mixed school where after grade 7 only girls remain.
Data collection
My primary data came in two phases.
Review of empirical studies
I gathered prior studies to analyze principals’ work in Pakistan and United States. The
question that guided this review was: How is the high school principals’ role similar or different
65
in Pakistan and from United States? This question was answered through the following three sub
questions.
What responsibilities do high school principals carry out in Pakistan and United States?
What (if any) challenges do they encounter in carrying out their responsibilities?
How do they address these challenges?
An initial electronic search was carried out through Eric, Pro-quest, Google scholar, and
J-store. In addition, I also used libraries for books and journals. The electronic research resulted
in 100,000 various articles, books search yielded one hundred and fifty books including book
chapters and entire books.
I selected articles using criteria that included peer reviewed journals as a first step. I
assumed that researchers would publish their empirical studies in peer-reviewed journals, which
tend to imply vigor and verified outcomes. Peer-reviewed journals such as International Journal
of Educational Research, Educational Leadership, Journal of Educational Administration,
Journal of Educational Research, American Educational Journal of Research and International
Journal of Educational Leadership were examined to collect data, because these journals are not
only peer-reviewed but are also directly related to leadership work in the schools. In addition to
the journals, I also used books that contained empirical research to increase the scope and
breadth of my search.
Initially, the intention was to include studies solely about the secondary school principals
in Pakistan and United States. After the initial search, I realized more studies included
elementary, middle and secondary school principals and/or comparisons to other Western
countries, in the case of United States. In order to increase the breadth and scope of the research,
I decided to use articles focused on principals in the United States only, as well as articles that
66
had mixed samples, elementary, middle, and secondary school principals. For research in
Pakistan, there was a scarcity of empirical studies published in peer-reviewed journals covering a
range of issues in school leadership. The following figure presents a summary of the process of
data collection, analysis and writing final reports.
Figure4: Review of Prior Studies
Terms
-secondary school/high school principals -ethical challenges for secondary school principals -decision making for secondary school principal -secondary/high school principals in Pakistan -Secondary/ high school principals in United States
Electronic
-Eric
-pro-quest
-Google scholar
-J-Store
Library
-Books
-Journals
Number of
material
100,000
Number of
material
- books (150)
- journals (50)
Search Strategies
Material Selection
-Peer reviewed journals
-Books containing empirical research
-Published between 1998- to date
-Included secondary school principals in Pakistan & U.S
-Mixed sample- elementary/middle/ secondary school principals
Data Analysis
Reading
Read each
material
three times
Codes
-words
-phrase
-sentences
phrases
-
Themes Reports
U.S.
Pakistan Final Report
Emergent
themes of
comparison &
Contrasts
67
Thirdly, the articles published between 1998 and present were used to include either
recent work and/or include recent changes in the education systems or the leadership practices in
schools. The table below summarizes the empirical studies gathered from each context.
Table2: Prior Studies Selected for Review
Summary of prior Studies in the Context of Pakistan
Authors Purpose Subjects Sample Size Instrument
Chugtai & Buckley (2009)
Khaki (2010)
Khan, Asif (2012)
Khan, Gulab (2010)
Khan, saeed, Fatima (2009)
Salfi & Saeed (2007)
Shafa, Mola Dad (2010)
Effects of
faculty’s trust
in Principal
Roles,
behaviors &
beliefs of
h.teachers
Instructional
behavior of
Principals
Principal-
Student
relationship
Assessing the
performance
of head
teachers
Relationship
among school
size, students
and culture
Nature of
challenges
head teachers
face
Knowledge
High school
teachers
Head teachers
High school
principals in
public/ private
schools
Principals &
students
Teachers of
boys and girls
schools
Principals of
secondary,
elementary
and primary
schools
Head teachers
Heads of
single sex
130 h. school
teachers
Three
Two schools
1 principals &
9 students
150 teachers
90 principals,
540
elementary
and high
school
teachers
three
68 heads
Questionnaire,
survey
Interviews,
observation,
documentary
analysis
Interviews,
observation,
documentary
analysis
Interviews,
observation
Questionnaire
Education
management
information
system
(EMIS),
annual result
reports
Extended
interviews
Questionnaire,
68
Shah (2010)
Simkins, Memon(2003)
Simkins, Garrett, Memon, Ali(2001)
gap in existing
literature
School
leadership in
Pakistan
Role of head
teachers in
Pakistan
colleges
(male/female)
Head teachers
in karachi
Head teachers
in Karachi
Six schools
interviews,
group
discussions
Six schools
Interviews,
diary studies
Table 3: Prior Studies Selected for Review
Summary of prior studies in the context of United States
Authors Purpose Subject Sample size Instrument
Cumm & Sherman
(2008)
Frick (2009)
Common themes
of school
leadership and
practices in
successful schools
in Virginia
Exploring school
leaders’ internal
struggles
High school
principals
Secondary school
principals
12
11
Qualitative
Study, in depth
interviews
Face-to-face
interviews
Henkin, Cistone,
Dee (1999)
Profile of
principals’
conflict
management
High school
principals
300 Quantitative
method
Horn, Klasik,
Leob (2010)
Jacobson, Johnson,
Ylimaki, Giles (2005)
Relationship
between
principals time
and outcomes
Leadership
practices in
challenges
schools
High school
principals
Principals-
elementary,
middle & high
41
07
Observations
Case Study
Method
69
Kersteen (2008)
Marks & Printy (2003)
Principals’ hiring
practices in
Illinois
School principals’
collaborative
measures
Principals-
elementary,
middle, high
Principals-
elementary,
middle and high
300
24
Questionnaires,
Web based
survey method
Survey,
Observations,
interview
Rutlege, Harris,
Ingle (2010)
Spillane, Camburn,
Pareja (2007)
The effects of
teacher- quality &
tests on teacher
hiring policies
School principals’
collaborative
measures
Principals-
elementary,
middle, high
school
Principals-
elementary,
middle, high
30
24
Mixed methods,
interviews,
observations,
questionnaires
Surveys,
Observations,
interviews
Lastly, after gathering material, I read each article to get a sense of the content and the
research method. Then I read the article a second time focusing on the purpose of the study and
the findings. In order to get a thorough familiarity with the U.S. school context, I read study
backgrounds thoroughly. Next, I read findings and coded, which were then grouped into
categories to constitute themes. Lastly, I used themes to develop reports. Since, I was analyzing
studies about two different contexts, I developed reports for each country. The reports were
further, analyzed to synthesize differences and similarities.
In-depth interviews
I collected primary data through interviews as a main strategy. Whether the interview is a
key strategy, for collecting data, or it is used with other techniques, the purpose is to “gather
descriptive data in the subject’s own words, so that the researcher can develop insights on how
subjects interpret some piece of the world” (Bogdan & Biklan 2002, p.103). For a study with
70
such a purpose, Marshall & Rossman (2011) recommend in-depth interview as a strategy for
gathering data.
Furthermore, philosophical underpinnings of phenomenological approaches have
informed my research strategies i.e. interviews and data analysis technique. I have not engaged
in a formal phenomenological investigation, which required adapting methods and substantive
knowledge of phenomenological philosophy. My interview approach in particular is, guided by a
phenomenological perspective. “Phenomenological interviewing is a specific type of in-depth
interviewing…rests on the assumption that there is a structure and essence to shared experiences
that can be narrated” (Marshall & Rossman 2011p.148). The two words that make
phenomenological interview different from any other mode are “life world” and “meaning”
(Kvale 2007). “Life world” refers to the situations the participants in a context face or
experience. “Meaning” refers to the interpretations and understanding participants gain from
their situations and experiences. In addition, Kvale (2007) suggests, “listen[ing] to the explicit
descriptions and to the meanings expressed, as well as, what is said between the lines” (Kvale
2007) to be able to extract meanings from the interviews. Seidman (2006) also explains:
“interviewing provides access to the context of people’s behaviors and thereby provides a way
for researchers to understand the meaning of that behavior (p.9, 10).
Thus, to achieve the goal of my study I based my research strategy on in- depth
interviewing, which could capture and explain principals’ experiences of ethical decision-
making. Further, I chose semi-structured in-depth interviews as the research instruments to seek,
spontaneous responses as opposed to pre-planned answers and detailed and descriptive
information about my participants’ experiences. This allowed me to probe further as I needed
more information. There are no hard and fast structured rules to assess the quality of an
71
interview. However, in order to be able to benefit from my interview process, I followed, in
particular, Bogdan & Biklen (2007) who opine, “Good interviews produce rich data filled with
words that reveal the respondents’ perspectives. Transcripts are filled with details and examples”
(p. 104). Furthermore, Seidman (2006) suggests “a three-interview series” which includes
“focused life history, details of experiences and reflection on the meaning” (p.18). In order to
best serve the purpose of my study I adapted the structure by combining all three stages and
constructing two stage interviews. Seidman (2006) supports exploring alternatives to his
proposed structure, “as long as a structure is maintained that allows participants to reconstruct
and reflect upon their experience within the context of their lives” (p.21).
Thus, interviews were conducted at the following two stages using two types of dilemma
analysis techniques (Marshall & Rossman, 2011). Dilemma analysis is a widely- used strategy to
study ethics in educational leadership. It allows a researcher to get a holistic picture of a dilemma
rather than seeking information in bits and pieces.
Stage I: “hypothetical, researcher- generated dilemmas” were used “… to elicit
perceptions, opinions, beliefs and attitudes from responses or comments to stories depicting
scenarios and situations” (Barter & Renald, 1999, p.1) Two dilemmas depicting real situations in
the context of Pakistan were shared with the principals for their comments. In addition to
eliciting their comments, the purpose of using dilemmas at this stage was to develop a rapport
with the participants and set the stage for the in-depth interviews as a next step. The dilemmas
helped participants to reflect on their own challenges as some of the participants shared similar
experiences even after the formal interviews ended, which were also audio recorded with the
participant’s permission.
Stage II: “real life, respondent- generated dilemmas” were employed in hour and half
72
long semi-structured interviews to help principals think of at least three most critical challenges
or issues they experienced in their professional lives. The purpose was “to get at the core of the
interview partner’s processes of thinking, assessing, valuing and judging” (Marshall & Rossman,
2011, p. 190). Data were recorded in order to ensure the reliability of the data collection strategy,
as well as data analysis, later. Likewise, the participants shared their experiences even after the
formal interview time was over. I recorded those experiences, too.
In addition, interviews adhered to 90 minutes “to have the participants reconstruct their
experience, put it in the context of their lives, and reflect on its meaning, [as] anything shorter
than 90 minutes for each interview seems too short” (Seidman 2006, p.20). Moreover, my
interviews took place “from 3 days to a week apart” to provide time for the participants to “mull
the preceding interview but not enough time to lose the connection between the two” (Seidman
2006, p.21).
Further, interview protocols were used as they “allow researchers to structure the
interview. The process of developing a protocol includes formulating questions, probes, and thus
compels the researchers to clarify and prioritize the information wanted from each interview”
(Harrell & Bradley 2009, p. 49). Each interview protocol began with an introduction of myself as
researcher, a brief statement of the purpose of my research, and the reason why the participant
was asked to be part of it (Harrell & Bradley 2009), and expression of my appreciation for their
willingness to be part of my study.
Analysis of primary data
Although data analysis “is the process of bringing order, structure, and interpretation to
the mass of collected data” (Marshall & Rossman 1999, p. 150), it was an integral part of my
collecting primary data at each step. Following Kvale (2007) advice, “clarifying the meanings of
73
statements during an interview will make the later analysis easier and more well founded” (p.42),
I paid particular attention to seeking more details and clarifications during the interviews.
Moreover, data analysis was also informed by the phenomenological approaches, as were the
primary data collection strategies. Data analysis in phenomenological research involves more
than just drawing meaning units/ codes or categories. A researcher needs to have an
understanding of the purpose of employing phenomenological approach to exploit appropriate
strategies. Hence, data analysis in phenomenological study, as in any other qualitative study,
requires philosophical underpinnings, as it is a process of making choices and decisions by the
researcher. If a researcher lacks a foundational understanding, s/he might end up with
inappropriate choices/ decisions or lack substantive analysis. In this regard, Choi (2007) explains
the term “descriptive,’ in phenomenological study in light of the research literature, and bridges
the differences between “transcendental and hermeneutical” phenomenology that account for
“descriptive and interpretive” respectively. Moreover, analysis involves meaning making, but
before meaning making one has to describe the phenomena understudied, which involves
“context of action, the intentions of the actor, and the process in which action is embedded” (Dey
1993, p.31). In this regard, the following were the steps taken for an in-depth analysis of data
discussed below.
Transcription of data
It is the first and foremost significant step in formal analysis as it allows the researcher to
read and develop a familiarity with and reflect on the data. After collecting data, I transcribed
each interview. As I was transcribing data, I listened to the interview and transcription itself
allowed me to reflect and note my initial analysis.
After transcribing data, I used software called NVIVO at the initial stages of sorting and
74
grouping data. I created a folder for each participant and created a file for groups of data.
However, at later stages, I preferred to go about analyzing data manually, partly due to my
challenges with technology. Furthermore, my analytic process followed similar phases as to
phenomenological research analysis techniques which involve “…the analysis of significant
statements [and] the generation of meaning units…,” (Creswell 2003, p. 191).
Epoche
A Greek word meaning, “to stay away from or abstain” begins while we are
conceptualizing the study, long before entering the field. However, it is considered an essential
part of formal analysis of data. According to Moustakas (1994),
the world is placed out of action, while remaining bracketed. However, the world in the
bracket had been cleared of ordinary thought and is present before us as a phenomenon to
be gazed upon, to be known naively and freshly through a “purified” conscience (p.85).
This implies that the researcher sets aside prior knowledge and understanding and
explores the participants’ worldview of the phenomenon in order achieve a deeper and renewed
understanding. In my view, the epoche takes place the moment the researcher meets a participant
to collect data. Hence, epoche in my study took place during interviews with the participants. I
paid attention to seeking more details and clarifications, during the interviews, to “make the alter
analysis easier and more well founded” (Kvale 2007). In addition, since the interviews were
conducted at two stages, so after each interview I listened to the content at least twice to get a
preliminary idea of the content and for questions that might arise.
Horizonalization
It takes place after all the data are collected that leads to identify themes at later analytic
stages. Horizonalization refers to the process of identifying every statement that is relevant to the
75
experience or the phenomenon under study in one way or the other. Each statement is of the
equal value at this stage to include all dimension of the phenomenon without being biased or
judgmental. In other words, it enables a researcher to go beyond the surface and expand vision
and perspective as far as possible. Hence, Moustakas (1994) suggests, to “list[ing] every
expression relevant to the experience” (p.120). Horizonalization was part of my analysis of data
particularly from phase two in which principals shared their experiences of ethical challenges. I
separated each statement that was representative of their experience in terms of action, decision
and its implication. I also separated statements that were reflective of their opinion, values/
beliefs.
Thematization
It involves “clustering the invariant constituents of the experience that are related into a
thematic label” (Moustakas, 1994, p.121). Van Manen (1990) describes a phenomenological
theme as a “structure of the experience”/ “experiential structure” (p.79). I clustered all the listed
statements for each participant and created a new file in NVIVO software. It seems that the
process of thematizaton is not as straightforward as it sounds (clustering relevant statements)
because as Moustakas (1994) advises, clustered statements should be validated for their
explicitness and compatibility. If the statements do not fulfill these two requirements, the
statements should be deleted. However, a researcher has to be mindful before applying these two
requirements to select the invariant constituents because meanings may not always be expressed
explicitly: rather a researcher may have to go beyond what is apparent. Hence, it took me more
time to read each statement repeatedly to decide if they were “explicit and compatible.”
76
Textural Description
It is the next phase in phenomenological analysis that involves writing a “description of “what”
the participants in the study experienced with the phenomenon. Textual description includes
verbatim examples from the data. Seidman (2006) terms it to be “participants’ profile” and
regards it as an “effective way of sharing interview data and opening one’s interview material to
analysis and interpretation” (p.119). The purpose of “textural description” or “participants’
profile” is to capture every dimension or phase of the experience by placing the “participant in
context, clarify[ing] his or her intentions, and conveying a sense of process and time, all central
components of qualitative analysis” (p.119). Constructing these profiles or textural description
made more sense for my study because its purpose was to look at socio-cultural context through
participants’ experiences. Hence, I combined the statements representative of their experiences,
and I developed a textual description for each participant to capture a holistic picture of
participants’ experiences of ethical challenges in Pakistan.
Data Findings
The next step in my analytic process included examining sorted data for patterns. Then I
organized data into categories/themes. I sorted through my labels and themes for those that were
similar or hung together. The themes that emerged from my data were my primary findings. I
used rich and relevant data to interpret and explain my findings.
Ethical issues
Ethical issues are an essential part of interview research as the focus is on the lived
experiences of the participants and some of these experiences may be too personal to be made
public (Kvale 2007). In this regard, informed consent is a first step towards addressing the
ethical issues in any research in general and in interview research in particular. The purpose of
77
informed consent is to share information about the interview research with the participant(s) and
let them decide if they want to be part of the study. In other words, the participation in the
research is voluntary. Therefore, in order to be ethical, I used informed consent (Kvale 2007)
including the items:
they are participants in research
purpose of the research (briefly)
risk and benefit of the research
the voluntary nature of the participation
the subject’s (informant’s) right to stop the interview at any time
the procedures used to protect confidentiality
The informed consent was explained at the beginning of each interview. This study held
minimum risk for the participants as the purpose of the study was to seek insight into their
professional experiences of challenges and the meaning they attached to these experiences.
However, in order to protect the confidentiality of the participants’ no names are used and the
decision was made after discussing it with the participants “whether or not they might actually
prefer to be named and to speak openly for themselves” (Kvale 2007, p.28). In addition, I sought
permission to do this research from the Internal Review Board at the Penn State University.
Researcher “Bias”
It is a natural element in qualitative studies, and it is not possible to overcome it entirely.
However, according to Maxwell (2005), the researcher should be aware of how his/her bias
influences the study in a positive or negative manner. In the case of my research, my background
in the organization and research could have been a potential threat to how I would have viewed
78
things in light of my professional experiences. For example, Marshall & Rossman (2011)
postulate advantages and disadvantages of familiarity with the context:
The problem of access should be less difficult, and the researcher should easily be able
to establish rapport with the participants- the researcher can pass as a colleague and the
interconnectedness between the researcher and the participants can contribute to a mutual
understanding that can lead to interpretations that are more accurate. Disadvantages
include researcher’s bias and subjectivity, and the inability to separate one’s self from the
research (p. 101).
It was easy for me to seek permission from the participants as well as the higher ups to
use the school’s sites for my study. The participants welcomed me and expressed their
appreciation that I asked them to share their experiences with me. In order to lessen the effects of
my familiarity with the context, I tried to seek details of information from the participants. I
probed as much as possible in order to challenge my preconceived ideas.
Reactivity
Reactivity in qualitative research refers to “reflexivity” which means that the researcher
has an influence on the participants. This influence may be positive or negative and the
researcher must be aware of possible influences. In the case of my study, the biggest reactivity
threat was the “leading questions” I might ask instead of letting the participant come up with the
responses because leading questions in qualitative interviews challenge potential biases, Kvale
(2007) defending the concept of leading questions, postulates,
Qualitative research interview is particularly well suited for employing leading questions
to repeatedly check the reliability of the interviewees’ answers, as well as to verify the
interviewer’s interpretations. Thus leading questions need not reduce the reliability of
interviews, but may enhance it….the decisive issue is not whether to lead or not to lead,
but where the interview questions lead, whether they lead to new, trustworthy and
worthwhile knowledge (p.88).
79
My efforts were to seek information that was detailed, insightful and beyond my
knowledge.
Validity
“In social science [the validity] pertains to the issue of whether a method investigates
what it purports to investigate” (Kvale 2007, p.122). Kvale is of the view that ensuring validity is
not a onetime activity when the interviews are over rather it has to be addressed throughout the
interview process. He, thus, presents general approaches to ensuring validity in interview
research among which is “communicative validity” involving “member validation”. Member
validation is also termed “respondent validation” by Maxwell (2005). He regards it as the “single
most powerful way of ruling out the possibility of misinterpreting the meaning of what
participants say” (p.111). However, he also cautions us against reliance on their feedback only as
their interview data are more valid than their feedback. I also shared the interview transcripts and
textural description of the interviews with the participants to address the threat of researcher bias.
In addition, Maxwell (2005) suggests using “rich data” to address validity threats. Rich
data refer to data that are “detailed and varied enough that they provide a full and revealing
picture of what is going on” (Baker 1970 cited in Maxwell 2005, p. 110). Creswell (2003)
opines, rich data may “transport readers to the setting and give the discussion and element of
shared experiences” (p. 196). In my study, I used rich data in the form of participants’ quotations
as well as “textural descriptions” i.e., firsthand accounts of participants’ stories. The rich data
came from in-depth and hour-and-half long interviews with five participants as well as their
responses to the vignettes.
80
Triangulation
It refers to “a diverse range of individuals and setting- variety of methods” to collect data.
In my study, I triangulated my data through two ways. Firstly, the data came from interviews
conducted at two stages. I triangulated the data from the first stage with the second stage within a
single case. For example, the purpose of interviews at the first stage was to explore participants’
values and beliefs through vignettes. The purpose of the second stage was to understand how
their values and beliefs led to their actions in practice through their own experiences. Secondly, I
triangulated data among the five participants or across the cases.
The whole process of conducting interviews entailed insights about not only the topic of
interest but also about the logistics of conducting interviews. Therefore, I maintained “work-
journal” to note down “construction of interview knowledge,” “changed understandings of
previous experiences”, as well as “reflections on the research process” (Kvale 2007, p.43), and
lessons learnt from the process.
Delimitations of the study
The scope of this study is small because the purpose of the study is to explain socio-
cultural and structural context that shape ethical decision of school principals in Pakistan and
United States. The sample does not represent the whole population of secondary school
principals in Pakistan. Hence, the findings are unique and particular to the contexts. However,
small sample size is not a limitation of this kind of study because ideas are generalizable. As
such thick description allows a reader to find connection(s).
Researcher’s role
Researcher has a pivotal role to play during research, especially interviews. Participants’
trust for the researcher makes probing and eliciting information easy in a relaxed and non-
81
threatening environment. It so happened in one of the interviews that after consenting form a
participant expressed his concern and relief at the same time. He said that he went to Toronto
University and happened to read a dissertation in which the participant was from his region. The
researcher was an outsider (a westerner), so he did not care for the context and wrote “nasty
things” about the participant, a matter of concern for my participant. Then he said that as I [the
researcher] come from the same context and I understand the culture he would not worry and
“trusts” me. I think this was an important point for me as a researcher to weigh my relationship
with my participant. Before going to the field, I thought being an insider might make me to be
biased. However, when my participant shared this incident and expressed his “trust” on me, I
realized that my status as an insider was an advantage as he was comfortable in sharing his
insights and viewpoints. My familiarity with the context helped me develop a positive rapport
with my participants.
82
Chapter 5
An Examination of Ethical Challenges for High School Principals in Pakistan
The study aimed at explaining the role of socio-cultural and structural forces that come
into play when principals engage in resolving key issues at their schools in Pakistan and United
States. The research strategy included a review of empirical studies about principals’
responsibilities in both countries and primary data through in-depth interviews.
In this chapter, I present my findings in three sections. Sections I-II shed light on findings
from primary data collected at phases one and two. In order to collect this data a set of two
vignettes reflecting true events were presented to the principals for their responses as well as
they were asked to share their experiences with ethical issues they had encountered. Section III
comprises comparative analysis and emergent themes from the empirical studies.
Section I
A portrayal of principals’ daily administrative lives
As one would expect, the immediate findings from the data reveal that the most common
issues facing the principals in the study involved issues about students, teachers, parents and
community members. However, it is a universal fact that principals all around the world have to
deal with diverse needs of the school members. What make these issues insightful are their
unique dimensions of socio-cultural context, school environment as well as historical, religious
or structural forces that come into play in constructing these issues.
Hence, in their daily work, principals face moral and ethical choices of varying degrees
of risk and intensity. Some issues require principals’ discretion, whereas there are other issues,
which require more than a solo decision or action. Such issues carry serious ethical implications
because of the various contradictions and confusions they present to principals in personal,
83
professional and community levels. Such issues go beyond the walls of the school building and
the involvement of others becomes inevitable. In this regard, when principals were asked to share
their experiences of ethical issues, each principal shared five to six vignettes/ stories that
highlighted ethical dilemmas of varying degrees for them. When placed on a continuum of
intensity, these issues revealed low intensity/ low risk, and high intensity/ high-risk kind of
nature. Hence, in order to better understand the nature of ethical challenges, these issues have
been categorized as such.
Figure5: Nature of issues
Low intensity/ low risk issues High intensity/ high-risk issues
Low intensity/ low risk issues
Low intensity issues include problems that are administrative in nature and occur on a
daily basis. Data revealed that such issues included students’ expulsions mainly due to the
attendance policy violations, insubordination, drug abuse such as cigarettes and/ or naswar (a
local chewing tobacco), and students’ financial needs.
Drug Abuse
It is particularly relevant to note that use of cigarettes/ naswar is prevalent in boys’
schools. Therefore, principals working at the boy’s schools have to ensure the implementation of
policy regarding drug abuse. One of the instances, shared by a principal, illustrated that each and
everyone in the school from the teachers to the security guards was at a watch on catch red-
handed who smoked, and if they caught, they would be expelled. For instance, one principal
shared that “the cigarette and naswar are very common in the society but not in our school: it is
not totally clean though.” In order to curb such issues, the principal had constituted a body of
84
“secret agents” consisting of students. These students would report to the principal to help
identify those who violated the policy. Moreover, this principal used religion to stop some of
religious students who were suspected to have been smoking. The principal made them swear on
Quran and promise not to smoke.
Attendance Policy Violation
Another principal raised up the issue of expelling a student for violating the school’s
attendance policy by coming back to school late after the summer vacation. The student had had
an opportunity to go on an expedition to earn some money to pay off his school fees, so could
not come back to school on time. The principal expressed the difficulty in implementing the
policy,
Here you can say it is so difficult for the principal to take this decision, for you have to
expel a student. What the student would do then. What could you do if the student was
absent without any information for a month? Yet you knew that the student was trying to
earn some money for school fees?
Another principal shared an instance which revealed that sometimes school policies
might hinder principals from addressing some of the students’ needs. For instance, in one case,
new school policies required that all the students would take a screening test in order for their
promotion to the next grade level. These policies were a significant source of worry for students
who failed. In this case, a student from a far-flung area staying in the dorm attempted to commit
suicide upon failing the screening test. The principal summarized her remarks,
Going back is very difficult for me, because my father spent a lot of money on me for
two years and I have stepmother as well. My father has two wives and I am from the first
wife. The new wife might tease me that you spent two years and came back.”
The principal could not do anything but to implement the policy asserting, “We cannot
compromise on quality.” Another instance depicted a simple yet highly significant issue that led
85
the principal to reflect on the entire system and school policies. The school’s uniform policy
required the students to wear a black coat in the winter. One day the physical education (PE)
teacher, who was also responsible to ensuring implementation of the policy, escorted a senior
student to the principal’s office and complained about her repeated violation of the coat policy.
Upon inquiry, what the student told the principal was enough to make her realize that the student
had no option but to violate the policy. The principal recounted her story,
Her family always purchased the stuff from second hand shops. When she was buying,
she only had money to buy one coat, it was very cold and there was no black coat
available there. Therefore, she had to buy a blue coat.
Data also showed principals’ sincere care for students dominated their decisions, as
opposed to following rules and implementing polices. For instance, the principal stated that a
teacher offered to help the student buy a black coat, but the principal refused. The principal
explained:
One of the teachers said that he could donate an amount of money for that. However, I
felt that we would be harming the self-respect of the student by saying that ok, if you
cannot do it then I am giving it to you but you have to follow the rules. Therefore, we did
not go for that option.
The principal decided to let the student wear the blue coat.
In another instance, the principal came across a student brought to her by the PE teacher
for not tying her hair back as part of her uniform policy. When the PE teacher reprimanded the
student and asked her to tie her hair back instead of showing bangs, the student was rude saying,
“do whatever you want: I don’t care! I will not tie my hair back!” The PE teacher had no choice
but to escort her to the principal’s office. The student’s story, according to the principal,
illustrated simple yet significant needs of a teenager. The student, an already- depressed child
86
due to her parents’ divorce, told the principal “my forehead is too large so I am terribly ashamed
of that and I do not want everybody to laugh at me. That is the reason I do my hair like that.”
Disciplinary Issues
However, sometimes principals also encountered problems because seemingly simple
decisions made for challenging situations. For instance, in one case a principal refused to let one
of the students share his ideas with newcomers at the school during an orientation session,
because he “did not know what the student was going to say.” Since the student was “…eager to
share his ideas with the new students, but he was not allowed to, he became angry, and he
thought about mischief, which could create a problem for the school.” Although the student
should have supposedly accepted the principal’s decision and kept quiet, he did otherwise. The
principal had to involve a disciplinary committee who decided to withdraw him from sitting for
final exams and to charge his parents a fee for punishment.
Teachers’ Insubordination
Another picture that emerged from the interviews was principals’ frustrations over the
inability to get teachers to understand their perspectives to accept change and improvement in the
school. In one case, a principal, after joining the school as a head, noticed issues with teachers’
attendance and punctuality. The teachers, according to the school policy were required to sign in
or sign out as soon as they entered the school or before they left the school. However, the
teachers would not sign it, or they would sign in and out at the same time before they left the
school. The teachers also had issues leaving the classrooms on time immediately after the bell.
They would take more time to finish their lessons, which created issues for other teachers who
got less time for their class.
87
In order to address the issues, the principal made some changes. Nevertheless, the
teachers resisted these changes strongly, as the principal said:
I went to the staffroom. When I entered, there was a situation where everyone was
about to shout at me. I realized the situation was tense, they were sitting there and none
of the teachers had gone to class.
What was surprising to the principal was that when he shared his decision to bring about
changes in the teachers’ attendance policies in a meeting prior to its implementation “none of the
teachers questioned this at that time.” However, the following day the teachers expressed their
complaints and the principal paraphrased their complaints as follows:
…you are trying to change this school culture; it is not acceptable to us. We do not accept
any policy and procedure. Our basic purpose of coming to the school is teaching to the
best of our abilities. Signing in the register is a secondary thing to us, which could be
done any time.
Then they threatened the principal, “…we will follow ok, but you will never expect us to
engage in other activities. We will not co-operate for co-curricular activities.”
Teachers’ Perspective vs. Principal’s Perspective
Similarly when teachers decided to stick to their own perspective of students’ discipline,
it left no choice for the principal but give in and accept their perspective. For one of the
participants in the study, it was a “painful” situation when the teachers resisted his way of
addressing students’ tardiness. They preferred that the late comers be sent back home so that
their parents would take a notice and make their children come to school on time. The principal
was of the view that punishing students by sending them home would not help but rather
encourage them to be late, as the students, instead of going back home would wander around and
spend their days elsewhere. The parents would never know that their kids were late and out of
school the whole day. The principal remarked,
88
The problem remained as severe as it was, so we continued with this punishment.
At times, we would have to tell more than fifty students to return home. It was very
painful. However, I knew that the teachers would never favor me if I had any other
system.
The principal had to collect data over a period to prove that sending students home
did not help.
High intensity/ High-risk issues
The high intensity/high risk issues present principals with “irreconcilable choices because
of the existence of the competing deeply rooted values” (Dimmock & Walker 2005). In this
regard, in order for a better picture of how principals faced difficult situations, textural
descriptions of five most poignant vignettes and most representative of the dilemmas shared by
the principals are presented here. These textural descriptions are the first person accounts of
stories constructed on “horizons of their experiences” (Mouskatas, 1994). Moreover, the stories
are presented after necessary editing for language brevity. It is also to provide discretion for the
reader to draw their own meaning of the events in the stories. Furthermore, a title is provided to
each story to capture the main issue at hand with a brief analysis at the end of each one.
Textural Descriptions/ Principals’ Stories
Students’ Selection
Around two years back, during our admission season a socially well-known person kept
calling me on phone, insisting and putting pressure that his brother’s daughter should get
admission here. There was tremendous pressure from the circles outside as well as from inside
the organization that the student should be given admission here. Everybody thought that the girl
was going in because she was the niece of that person. However, our admission policy required
us to follow the merit.
89
Therefore, we always display our lists of the applicants who qualify the test and
interview, and it is always in front of the community. We have an admission committee, and we
take up all these things in a transparent way because we know that it is the right of the deserving
students to be in the school. Nonetheless, there was so much pressure that I thought at one time I
could resign. The person tried to harass me, e.g., “if you do not do this we will cut off water for
the school, there will be people around, and you will be unsafe.” I said taking away the right of
one person who qualifies for admission and offering it to another person who does not qualify
would be unfair, and I would never be able to forgive myself for that. I faced a lot of pressure,
but I resisted.
More importantly, the person in question had spread rumors that we were not
considering the merit. Unfortunately, if there is someone who has a distinctive position then
people not only respect him or her but also believe that person. I had people coming in all the
time asking about that girl. For instance, “We have heard that you have taken some other
applicant in her place, and she deserved it.” I had to explain our admission policy and process
to people, as some of them did not know about it. I also had to take my staff in confidence
because they checked the papers and knew the situation. My admission committee helped me a
lot. Since they are part of the community at large, whenever such a question arose, they
explained the admission process informally.
Meanwhile, it happened that some of the admission committee’s relatives, who had
applied, could not qualify, and they were not offered admission. Then the community realized
that if something like that could have happened then, maybe most of these girls [related to the
admission committee members] could have gotten into the school. Therefore, pressure was
90
removed in that manner as well. At the end, shukar [Thanks God], everything went well and we
were able to maintain and follow our merit policy.
Analysis: The above vignette is representative of some of the toughest challenges my
participants cited. The schools had a prime objective to provide quality education to the
deserving students in the region, who could not otherwise afford to join other quality institutions
in the country after middle school. For this purpose, the schools’ admission policy required merit
based selection at grade eight. However, the principals faced enormous conflicts in terms of the
differences between the school's objective and community’s demands and expectations of
relationship-based decisions. Hence, a conflict arises for principals where they are pressured to
act in favor of some candidates and against standard rules and policies.
Students’ Strike
Last year, in the month of August, the members of the student council came up with
complaints about four female teachers’ social activities outside the school. The students claimed
that since the teachers were away from their homes, they would always go to the market and
socialize with shopkeepers. When students went to market, the people there made fun of them
and talk bad about their teachers’ characters. It had a big impact on students’ social
development in the class.
They also said that the previous principal never took any action against those teachers,
so they asked me to discuss it with the high ups of the organization. The next day, GM also told
me on the phone that the same students had gone to the Regional Education Board (REB), and
the regional council with complaint and asked them to take necessary action against those
teachers. Then she [GM] came, with the manager academics, to meet with the students. The
students, after expressing their concerns and complaints, said, “You have two weeks to transfer
91
or expel these teachers. We do not want them in our school,” and threatened us with locking the
entire school and going on strike. The GM tried to convince them that this was a policy matter
and she could not transfer or expel any teacher upon students’ dissatisfaction or complaints
against them. However, the students were terribly angry, and they said, “NO, we want these
teachers out of our school as soon as possible.” They wanted this action within two weeks. The
GM told they were not allowed to hold strikes. After the GM left, I also asked them to wait and
they agreed to wait. However, after exactly two weeks, one morning I found all the doors locked.
I searched for students and found two of them standing outside. I asked them to give me the keys.
Initially they were highly reluctant to give the keys, and later on, with the help of some senior
teachers, I retrieved the keys from them.
It was one week after summer vacations, I could not do any other thing; I could not think
about any other option, and I had a strong fear that this time the students were going to do a
serious thing. That is why I called the GM and asked her to come and decide about the teachers.
The first day was extremely challenging, as they were not listening at all. We tried to convince
them but they said, “No. Right now you have to decide whether these teachers will stay, or will
they be transferred or expelled?”
As a final decision, we messaged their parents through letters and phone calls. In the
letters, we had used some harsh words like “aap kay batchay guzishta kuch arsay say kuch ghair
ikhlaqi kaamoon main mulawis hai aur” [your children have engaged in unethical activities at
the school].” The purpose was to bring the parents in school because they do not respond to
reasonable letters and meet. However, after receiving the letters and phone calls the parents, of
the girls were worried about their daughters’ characters and behavior toward their teachers.
This created a concern among all students but especially girls.
92
I called all those students and explained how we had drafted the letters and told them
that since we had agonized so too their parents should suffer. The parents came; they were
worried about the wordings of the letter and were angry with their daughters because they
perceived negativity about their daughters’ characters. I, along with some of my teachers,
discussed the matter in detail. Parents felt extremely sorry for that. It was shocking for them that
their children in the school engaged in acts and created such shameful situations. Meanwhile,
luckily, one of the teachers was transferred and the other teacher was waiting for a transfer, the
third teacher resigned and the fourth one was leaving the school soon. It was a matter of four
teachers and the decision placated the students. The students went to their classes, and we
resumed our teaching and learning process.
Analysis: The story brings to light the issues of social norms, gender inequality, and
complexities of an environment that demands complex choices by the principals. At the
organizational level, it brings to light a clash between the formal policy, and principal’s
discretion, a theme discussed in detail in the next chapter. The principals in these schools have
tremendous responsibility but, in some ways, they lack the authority they need to carry out those
responsibilities. So it is a clash between the formal rules/policies and allowing principals to
improvise to solve problems.
A students’ expulsion
A girl was involved in what appeared to be so-called affair with a boy in the school,
something that is by no means acceptable to the community. A relationship like this could lead to
the closing of the school. The girl did not complain directly but attempted to commit suicide.
The teachers later found that a boy, who had written a love letter to her, had intimidated the girl.
The teachers further investigated the case and collected the evidence. We found that she was
93
involved initially but she was trying to break the connection. There was no clear solution. I
expelled the boy and told him that I would not give him a good character certificate because he
was not a good character boy, according to my understanding. So, he threatened to go to court.
He said that there was no evidence against him and he had done nothing wrong. We had a lot of
convincing evidence such as letters, recorded interviews with many other students involved in the
process, and the medicine with which the girl tried to commit suicide. In addition, I knew in
Pakistani courts, I would not be able to prove anything. Even if I had provided all the evidence,
the case could have gone against me. Any other court, in the civilized world, would have
accepted the substantial evidence and taken action against that boy but it was certainly not
possible in our case and situation.
Most importantly, under the pressure of the board of governors, I knew I was not in a
position to punish that boy. However, the girl was in trouble and, despite being a victim of
harassment, she was going to bear the biggest burden of the punishment, which was not morally
right as, I understand. The parents took the girl back home due to community and peer pressure.
They said they were not going to let her continue her studies at that school because she had been
defamed. It was not possible for her to survive as a student there.
Although the girl had encouraged the relationship initially, she realized later that it was
not in her best interest to remain in that relationship and decided to break it. I thought that she
should be saved from this entire problem because, at least, she had realized that she was not
doing a righteous thing for the school and her family. Therefore, I requested the general
manager, to transfer her to a sister school in another region, and she was transferred. We had to
settle with the boy by granting him readmission under the pressure of Board of Directors (BOG).
However, I accepted that only after the girl had been transferred.
94
I realized that if the girl could be saved by compromising, I should compromise.
Therefore, I accepted the BOG’s support for the boy, because if the boy had gone to court, I
would have had to accept his readmission. It was a fair bargain for me. At least the girl
graduated from the other school because she was not under any pressure from the community,
she earned decent grades, and she passed. She got the right opportunity to continue her
education.
Analysis: This story not only signifies the intense risks of a wrong decision but also
shows a dilemma between the well being/ the best interest of the girl and intense cultural values
in the community. The principal is torn between acting on behalf of a girl who he believes is a
victim, though a nice person, and should not have her life ruined by the social norms of the
community, which inclined to punish, shun and sanction the girl.
Teachers’ resistance
I joined this school with a target and expectation from management to bring quality. The
school already had staff members who were recruited at the time of school’s inception from the
availability human resources at that time. However, now we were expecting to upgrade the
school towards higher secondary and change the medium of instruction to English, we needed
master’s degree holders in all subjects. Therefore, I wanted to create positions for the new
faculty by transferring some existing teachers to other schools in the region where masters’
degree were not a requirement to teach. However, it was a challenge because most of them were
female teachers and transferring them to other schools was a challenge for: a) they were not
ready b) it was even morally difficult for me to transfer all those women to far places.
Nonetheless, I took a risk and did that. I conducted their appraisal based on the tools suggested
by the organization. I found that the teachers were not qualified to stay in this school but might
95
be suitable for standard Diamond Jubilee (DJ) schools. I met all the teachers and discussed the
appraisal results with them.
It was particularly interesting that some of the women cried, complained and tried to
resist. One of them said, “You should respect your seat as well, you are in a good position, so
you should not do things like this for it will be bad for you.” I explained the consequences of not
signing on the appraisal result in the form of an independent appraisal by an outsider. They did
not take the risks acknowledging the appraisals fair.
Then I had a session with them to discuss their transfers. It was extremely difficult
because, first, they agreed: then, they refused and resisted. First, they thought that they would
not be transferred because the school had a long history of making such decisions. Their
transfers could never be executed. They thought that this principal would just forget and would
follow the former principal’s policies and work with them. I was quite strict in my rules and
policies, so they resisted.
One teacher resisted a lot and created problems for me rather than moving herself. She
talked to the senior management alleging lot of things. Moreover, she told all the teachers that
on the day she was transferred, he [the principal] would be killed. One day, her husband
threatened me verbally; and I received unknown messages on my mobile. Then her husband
came here during SMC [school management committee] meeting, where GM and the director
were also present.
Her husband told the general manager: “if my wife is transferred whoever makes this
decision, La illaha illalah Mohammadur Rasullulah [swear] I will kill that person on the same
day.” Then the general manager said, “But if it is in our plan and if your wife is not needed by
the school she will be transferred. Whatever actions you plan to take go ahead.” He left
96
afterwards. Then we decided to transfer her. The threat was against me because the GM was not
transferring her. It took a month for the management to finalize the decision. I talked to the
teacher, I convinced her, and she said, “Ok but I will talk to my husband.” Later, she refused
and told us that her husband disagreed.
This dilemma went on, because they did not want to take the risk of something happening
to me. I asked the senior management to send the letter and let me take the risk. They did not
send it. Then, I used the community leadership: at the last moment, I sought help from mukhi (a
local community leader). I informed him about the whole situation. He convinced the teacher’s
husband who accepted his wife’s transfer.
Analysis: The vignette illustrates the issue of personalism versus universalism. The
teacher’s resistance to following standard operating procedures and wanting a personalistic
treatment also illustrates the intensity with which these feelings are held. Teachers considered
transfer as an offence and an insult. Therefore, the teacher and her husband threatened to kill the
principal.
Disciplinary Action
One of the teachers was unusually late after the winter vacation. He did not appear for
two weeks. It was terribly difficult to contact him because he had not left with us any direct
contact. I think it was two weeks later that we heard from him. He explained that the road
blockage that had kept him away. The road had remained blocked for a week only and most of
the teachers, who were stuck down country because of it had already come back. It was a policy
as well as a personal issue. The teacher gave the road blockage as well as issues in his family as
reasons why he was late, yet there were policy procedures for me to follow. I had to take a
disciplinary action as per HR policies of the organization.
97
Now there was a tussle between the emotional aspects of working as a principal and the
policy aspects. One has to ensure implementation of the policy. If the policy was not
implemented then that might have been a precedent for other teachers to not follow the policy.
Therefore, I wanted to implement the policy, but in a manner that the teacher received the least
amount of penalty. I talked to some colleagues who were in the HR and the only way out was to
make the teacher explain in writing why he was absent for so many days without any contact.
I issued him a show-cause notice to justify his absence. He probably took it personally
and thought that I was victimizing him. He was, of course, a senior teacher, a competent one and
I did not want him to lose his spirit and morale. I first talked to him in person, explaining the
reasons why I had to issue a show-cause notice and why he was required to submit an
explanation within a timeframe.
He went to the senior management complaining against the show-cause notification
saying it was humiliating. Anyhow, the senior management talked to me and I had to explain
why I had taken a disciplinary action. However, the teacher decided to resign. I requested him
not to take this extreme step and not to take it personally because it was purely an organizational
and a policy issue. I tried to counsel him but he did not accept and submitted his resignation.
That was a very, very critical point, losing a competent teacher and finding that teacher labeling
this issue as something personal while I had no personal grudges against him.
Analysis: The vignette illustrates how principals’ professional ethics and ethics of justice
conflict with a teacher who insists on special, personal treatment. More importantly, the high ups
seem to be influenced by personalistic demands of individual teachers. The principals are not
just being pressured by the teachers but also sometimes influenced by people above them.
98
Emergent Themes
An in-depth analysis, of the above stories and other instances shared by the principals,
revealed four key themes. The first theme in this regard, is:
Geselschaft vs. Gemeinschaft: Intense pull between organizational bureaucracy and
“organic” demands
Various instances, principals shared indicated an intense pressure upon principals to
follow bureaucratic process and demands locally. The organizational processes demand proper
implementation of policy within the school, whereas the personalistic orientation of the locals
expects relationships based decisions. In either case, principals have to face the consequences
because they have to mitigate the situation by balancing both sides. This creates an intense stress
for the principals.
Four out of five principals shared instances that indicated immense pressure to violate
organizational or school policies and demanded a preferential treatment that created conflicts for
them. For instance, the story “Student selection” is an excellent example of conflicts and
competitive values as various aspects of principals’ decision like professional ethics, personal
accountability, personal values of justice, fairness and personal/ institutional integrity are at
stake. The principals’ claim that influential people get more respect and are believed whatever
they say captures a wider socio-cultural environment in which the principals’ work is embedded.
In another case, a group of people representing ISI, special branch, and military intelligence
came to a principal to investigate “discrepancies in the admission process” and find out why an
applicant was not admitted. They expressed their doubts that the applicant was dropped
deliberately to offer a place to another applicant. In spite of principal’s explaining the process
and transparency of the process, they insisted on seeing the applicant’s papers. Then they tried to
99
force the principal to take the applicant in by telling him that they had links with the education
minister of the region who could take the matter to any level.
Moreover, the story “Teacher’s resistance” illustrates how teachers create ethical issues
for principals by sticking to their personal interest rather than looking at the larger interest of the
students. Yet the story “Disciplinary action” also highlights the principal’s battle to implement
the policy and teacher’s insistence on individual, personal treatment. It creates a dilemma for
principal because, if the policy is not implemented, the principal might lose the legitimacy of his
decision and authority and if he implemented the policy, he might lose a competent and seasoned
teacher. Losing a competent and seasoned teacher is equally critical given the conditions of the
region where it is hard to find good quality teachers. The teacher’s resignation could also set
precedence for other teachers to resist a principal’s decisions in future, making it impossible for
him to follow and implement policy. In either case, the principal is vulnerable.
Data highlighted performance appraisals are another area, which held ethical challenges
for principals. Performance appraisals lead to “merit awards.” According to the organizational
policy, each school had a twenty percent quota for granting awards such as “outstanding,
excellent, and good to the teachers.” Since the “…appraisal is linked with pay,” the principals
felt helpless and limited when it came to deciding who should get the excellent grades because
the organizational policy demanded only twenty percent of outstanding/excellent grades to their
staff. One principal summarized the challenges pertaining to performance appraisal system,
Sometimes we encounter situations where we believe that we don’t have good
parameters to measure exact capacity of the teachers to really differentiate between two
teachers by, for example, a two point difference placing one excellent and the other
average. So we deceive ourselves by saying you are 270 and you are 271.5.
Logically and humanely, it is not possible to gauge people with the accuracy, our
organization expects from us.
100
This put principals in hot water as one of the participants described the situation,
“particularly talking about last year I felt that there should have been more people who should
have been given an excellent grade, but I could not do anything about it.” Moreover, sharing the
results of their appraisals with the teachers was yet another challenging task for principals for
two reasons. Firstly, the principals had to convince the teachers of the legitimacy and accuracy of
the appraisals. Secondly, the principals had to persuade the teachers that they would get excellent
grades next time and be motivated to maintain the quality of their work. For an instance,
Although it is not, officially and systemically legal, I have to persuade them that way
…. However, I am not always successful persuading them. Sometimes the teachers
become disheartened with this system and they lose heart. They stop working with
enthusiasm they had working with previously.
Another principal expressed her view of the appraisals and difficulty associated with
them, “If you cannot compensate when it comes to money, then you cannot compensate for
anything.” Data also showed that implementation of the organizational policy was a challenge
for almost all the principals, as teachers reacted in many different ways even if they were guilty
of violating it. Moreover, all of the research participants talked about their professional
responsibilities, their accountability and organizational as well as community expectations that
created a tremendous amount of pressure on them. For an instance:
…to develop students with an already refined capacities and develop them at the level
what the community expects is a big challenge for us. For some schools in the region,
people would say that is just enough if they give some good performance. Nevertheless,
in our case they are always expecting the best. Therefore, I am always under pressure to
improve the students and the school continually.
Likewise, two other participants expressed that their main professional responsibility is to
develop leaders of the future. One principal shared, “vision of the school is to develop the
talented female students from across Gilgi-Baltistan and prepare them for future leadership
101
roles.” Another principal endorsed the point, “one of the six objectives of the school is to
develop leaders…. To produce leaders …my responsibilities are very, very different from the
other schools.”
Now the question is how the objectives of the school contribute to the administrative
challenges for the principal. The objectives themselves are not challenging: rather how the
principal has to work amidst the limited human and material resources as well as the attitude of
people interfere with schools can accomplish. For instance, one of the participants asserted: “the
policies are not the biggest hindrance. It is the behavior, attitudes of the community members
and leadership. I cannot change their understanding single handed.”
Principal’s comment highlights how the bureaucratic processes within the organization
hamper situations:
Start with the organization as an umbrella. For example, do they say that teaching is
their core job? Is it so within the community? Is it so within the systems? What is the
position of teachers? Do they improve their lives as time passes? Or is it the forces
outside of teaching that control leadership? These are the issues, which are so important
and the principal is sometimes helpless.
This comment is pertinent in terms of the conflicts. On one hand, the organization places
an emphasis on quality teachers, yet the teachers are the least beneficiaries in terms of monetary
incentives. Furthermore, the unavailability of the financial resources that could help the
principals meet their needs and expectations posed a formidable challenge. As one principal
shared, “I do not believe in paying people according to performance. What I understand is that
they should be paid according to the market demands, which we cannot do while remaining
within this system.” The principals are responsible to meet the local demands of providing
excellent quality education with all the available resources. However, the bureaucratic processes
at the organizational level limit principals’ space to make decisions at the local level when it
102
comes to hiring teachers. In other words, principals are given tremendous responsibility, but not
granted discretion to make decisions.
Pressure of culture/ religious mores: “Unwritten Rules”
Pakistan is a conservative society with distinct roles and responsibilities for men and
women. Some of the cultural practices are so rigid that deviating from them may cause serious
consequences especially for women society. Hence, the pressure of cultural/ religious mores
emerged as another important theme that highlighted ways in which principals faced conflicts in
trying to make an ethical decision.
Four of the five research participants worked at schools, which were all girls, boys and
girls, or mixed schools (from kindergarten to grade seven co-education, and grade eighth
onwards all girls). These parameters offer challenges their professional obligations. These
schools are located in communities that are, linguistically, ethnically, culturally and regionally,
distinct from each other, yet they share similar concepts of moral standards. These principals,
despite being highly educated, cannot go beyond the limits set by the society.
One of the research participants put it, “…you have to care for the certain boundaries
of…society, certain boundaries have been laid down…. There are unwritten rules…unwritten
regulations.” In case of the violation of “unwritten rules and regulations”, the school members,
whether students or teachers, face severe consequences, because “people become very reactive in
some cases.” The story “Students’ Strike” represents such a situation, in which apparently
students’ representative council complained against a group of female teachers’ personal social
activities. They decided to force management, by holding a strike to take measures against the
teachers. This situation is indicative of the societal values and social norms of how women
should behave in the community, and how their individual and personal actions are tied all
103
around them. Women are required to be modest, which means they are not allowed to interact
with strangers and must stay within the confines of their walls after they are done with their
professional responsibilities in this case teaching.
The principal’s expression, “…I had a fear that they were going to do something serious”
shows that even principal’s professional authority would be in jeopardy when it came to dealing
with gender issues and violation of moral standards of modesty for women. The students’ strike
could instigate the community’s reaction and the principal could have faced serious
consequences. The principal could lose his job as well as trust of the community.
The cultural/ religious mores also create gender inequalities that include differences in
treatment for men and women. As happened in the case of “student’s expulsion” in which a girl
and boy were both guilty (for want of a better word) of having in a relationship. However, the
girl was the one who was going to face the consequences. The boy threatened the principal with
the legal consequences for his expulsion. Despite all the evidences, the case could have gone
against the principal if the boy dragged him to the court. The BOG, on the other hand, also
consisted of all male members, so they were all operating with a set of moral values that barred
them from going outside the box. Instead of seeing the “victim,” they only noticed the victimizer
and decided to support him. The principal in this case is not only faced with the challenge of the
general community and their social norms, but a group of people who have a decision making
power and who are operating within traditional mindset. The principal had no choice but to
compromise and strike “a bargain” that at least made it possible for him to “save the girl from the
entire trouble” of facing community’s wrath and losing her future.
Moreover, the principal’s expression “she had realized that she was not doing a good
thing for the school and the family” connotes a cultural meaning according to which girls’
104
involvement in such relationship is tied to family’s honor and school’s reputation, whereas boys
are exempted from such responsibilities. As in this case, for the girl all the future doors could
have been closed because she had been involved in a relationship with a boy. The girl felt so
troubled that she decided to end her life. The situation created a serious concern or fear for the
principal that the school would be challenged in terms of not getting girl applicants the following
year because the incident had sent a negative message to all the prospective students and their
parents. Parents would think that the girls in the school were not able to maintain the “moral
standards” of modesty and school was not a suitable place for their education.
Another principal supplemented the point explaining her concern conducting co-
curricular activities for girls at her school because “If, God forbid, something happens to one
student, then nobody would be ready: they will be scared! They will not be ready to send their
daughters to the school. Therefore, I have to be extremely careful about these things.” Hence, the
responsibility of maintaining the society’s moral standards within the girls’ school is considered
one of the prime objectives of the principals’ professional responsibilities. Principals in such
schools have to be extra careful.
Cultural mores also cause conflicts for principals, and they do not feel comfortable in
enforcing some of the bureaucratic rules because they are affected by cultural norms. As such, a
principal, in the vignette, “Teachers’ resistance,” felt uncomfortable for implementing his
decision of transferring female teachers who had underperformed because, culturally, men must
respect and take care of women, creating a moral discord. The teacher’s expression, “you should
respect your seat. You are in a good position, so you should not do things like that. It would be
bad for you” has a cultural connotation of gender as well as professional relationships.
According to the gender norms, the principal, a male, has to be sensitive to the women staff
105
members’ needs; whereas professional relationships required the principal to respect his
subordinates even if it meant overlooking the policies while he held authority and power.
Culturally the principal should take care of his staff, especially the females, for otherwise, it
could be considered injustice, and the principal could face opposition. In other words, the
teachers were trying to invoke the fear of vengeance by the principal in reminding him of his
cultural responsibilities.
Intensity of potential of threats to survival
Principals facing challenges not only have to make the toughest ethical/ moral choices
but also are in the forefront of facing consequences for making those choices. Hence, the serious
consequences for principals in the form of threats emerged as a vital theme. These threats came
from the members within as well as outside the school. Coercion is an aspect of the work
environment in Pakistan. Influential people manipulate powers to get desired result. When such
people in the society go to any extent in trying to force principals to give into their demands, not
only are a principal’s career and life at stake but the safety and security of the entire institution
are in danger.
In this regard, the vignette, “student selection” highlights multiple dimensions of the
difficulties of making ethical decisions for principals in general and woman principals in
particular. The one principal received threats of having strange people sent around to her school
for not admitting an applicant on demand. The threat of having strangers around a girls’ school
has a cultural nuance for the principal as a woman and for the students as girls. The parent of the
applicant knows that having strangers around a girl’s school makes the communities feel unsafe
in a conservative society. Most importantly, if there were strange people around the whole cause
106
of the principal being there would be lost for she looked capable of safeguarding the school.
Furthermore, the nature of the threat shows typical male chauvinism in the society and
vulnerability of female professionals. When a woman, highly educated and professional, stands
against an injustice and makes an independent decision the society uses tactics that could create
vulnerability which makes her think of quitting her job rather than inflicting consequences of
her decisions on the entire institution.
Another instance recounted by a principal who decided to transfer some teachers due to
their underperformance, revealed how local people, teachers as well as community members,
exceeded beyond limits for their personal interests and benefits rather than the benefits of the
students. For instance, one of the teachers “told all the teachers that the day she would be
transferred, [the principal] would be killed.” This was a very strong message that not only
announced the resistance, but also invited others to take any step to make the principal alter his
decision of transferring them. More importantly, the seriousness of the situation was multiplied
by the fact that the teacher’s husband went to a meeting held at the school and told the general
manager (GM), “If my wife is transferred, whoever makes this decision, La illaha illalah
Mohammadur Rasullulah (swore to God) I will kill that person on the same day.” The person’s
intensions were extremely serious because swearing on Allah and his Prophet (P.B.U.H) is an
extreme step in expressing one’s intensions especially of killing. It also proves that such a person
would execute his intention eventually.
There might be multiple reasons for such a reaction. First, the principal did not belong to
the community for he had come from another region so it was like an outsider coming to their
school and trying to rule them. This also brings to light the concept of regionalism, which is
somewhat similar to the tribal values of biradari system mentioned earlier, where an outsider is
107
not considered loyal to the benefits of the biradari. Secondly, the institutional culture had
strengthened teachers’ resistance in the past. These teachers had been there right from the time of
school’s inception so being local; they felt possessive about the school. They knew how to
manipulate resources and resist management decisions. Yet, another instance, in which the
principal received threats, was when the principal refused to admit a student applicant who was
not qualified. The principal received phone threats that he would be beaten up in the market, and
he would meet extreme consequences if he did not alter his decision.
Another research participant cited an incident in which the community members,
especially the parents of the applicants, were furious over the screening test results because the
student could not qualify and dropped out. The principal stated,
[One day] my office boy and other people told me: sir, please do not come out today….
three people were waiting for you at the gate having [holding] an iron bar…. but because
you were not there, they left and they will come again…. it was because of the result and
they were angry…
Thus, whether the principals made decisions due to personal values, or professional
obligations there were tremendous pressures and challenges. In addition, sometimes parent
expectations demanded the principals to go beyond their professional capacities creating
challenges. For instance, in one case parents wanted the principal to start an alternative program
for the student who failed admission test. However, upon explaining that it was not possible, one
parent became angry, and threatened, “if my daughter is out, then we do not need the school.”
Another principal encountered a situation when a high government official, who was also
affiliated with the judiciary, called the principal and tried to force him to overlook merit policy
and admit his son. When the principal showed resistance to his pressure, he threatened him
108
“mein dekhoon ga [I will see you].” These words of a principal capture the intensity of potential
threats to survival for the principals working in that environment:
So many things are the problems. That is why I do not go out. I live inside these
premises, and I am very much safe. I do not want to move around. I have not been to
any one’s home because I think avoiding that is safe for me.
The above statement reflects the psychological pressure on the principals, as they are
aware of consequences and limits for their roles in the community.
“A tussle between emotional and professional aspects of working as a principal”
The theme comes from a statement made by one of the sample principals, which seemed
an apt expression that also cut across all stories shared by other sample principals. While sharing
their experiences of ethical challenges, principals kept reflecting on how they felt and what their
thoughts were at the time of the incident. In doing so, they made significant statements that not
only offered a window to peep into their understanding of the incident but also helped me
explore the personal and professional values and beliefs that also seemed to be their driving
forces in making tough choices. Hence, the theme reflects the internal world of the sample
principals while faced with critical and extreme situations, which challenged their personal
values as well.
Data revealed that making ethical decisions is a process of constant struggle. This
struggle can best be termed as the battle between self, profession and socio-cultural expectations.
The self revolves around principals’ personal values of right and wrong, justice, fairness, care,
concern, and values of responsibility as a member of the wider community, while the profession
revolves around professional obligations and responsibilities. Lastly, socio-cultural expectations
revolve around what the principal is expected to do by its community members.
109
The ethics of the profession as suggested by Shapiro & Stefkovich (2011) demand that
the decision of the principal should be grounded in the best interest of the clients, in this case
students. However, sample principals’ stories illustrated that the wider values of preferential
treatment to those who hold influential positions in the society challenge this aspect of the
principal’s professional obligations. The principal’s personal codes of fairness and justice are
conflicted by the community’s values of preferential treatment. The principal’s expression, “it is
the right of the deserving students to be inside and not everybody on pressure” shows the
principal feels torn between personal values of making honest decisions and keeping the integrity
of the school’s process and community expectations without violating the policy.
Moreover, for principal making a dishonest decision of admitting an applicant on
pressure would not only conflict her sense of professional obligations but also would not be
acceptable personally. Although, the principal was under “tremendous pressure” from the
external forces, the personal accountability seemed to be stronger for the principal even thought
of resigning, and letting her career go, rather than making an “unfair” decision that would haunt
her for the rest of her life. She said: “I would never be able to forgive myself for that.” For
another principal, implementing a policy that made a senior teacher “show cause” of his long
absence was uncomfortable due to its implications for the teacher’s career. On one hand, he had
to act as a principal when he needed to fulfill his professional obligations. On the other, the
principal felt personally uncomfortable for he was being perceived as lacking feelings and
emotions for the teachers. Therefore, when in response to the “show cause notice” the teacher
resigned, the principal “requested him not to take this extreme step and not to take it personally
because it was purely an organization and policy issue.” The principal’s expression “that was a
very, very critical point losing a competent teacher and then that teacher labeling this issue as
110
something personal while I had no personal grudges against the teacher” indicates the
complexity of the situation especially at a personal level. Another principal reflected on one of
her situations,
I spent a lot of time debating in my own mind about everything in the appraisal tool that
I had. I had to give excellent grade to certain numbers of people and I felt bad about
that because I felt it was not fair to some of the staff. I had to think through a lot and I
think it was one of the toughest times in my life.
The case “a students’ expulsion” also illustrated how a principal had to alter his decision
of expelling the boy for harassing a girl because of his personal values. The principal thought the
boy did not have a “moral character” and violated ethical values by his act, and the girl deserved
support from everyone to survive in that community. However, the principal had to fight for the
girl by letting the boy into the school and transferring the girl. Thus, the theme is also indicative
of a struggle for principals to create a space for personal, moral accountability in the presence of
organizational bureaucracy on one hand and local demands and expectations, on the other.
Section II
Principals’ responses to the researchers’ vignettes
As part of data gathering process, explained in the chapter on methodology, I created
vignettes based on true events. As part of two-tier interview process with the participants, I used
two vignettes (depicting dilemmas) to seek sample principals’ responses to a set of questions.
This section presents their responses.
Vignette 1: Student’s absence
This incident took place at one of the colleges for girls situated in an urban area in
Pakistan. The college had a dormitory for students who came from far off places. The dorm had
strict rules and regulations for students’ visitors. Shahida (pseudonym) was a student in her third
111
year of studies who lived in the dorm because her parents lived abroad. She was a devout
Muslim and covered herself from head to toe according to her religious beliefs. One day the
warden discovered that Shahida had not returned after the weekend. Although, the woman she
left with, had signed her out and was her friend, she was not a registered guardian. This created
a stir among the boarding staff. The warden decided to inform the principal of the matter
immediately.
The principal became furious.The next morning the principal arrived and asked other
students if they knew anything about Shahida. Meanwhile, the girl arrived to attend her classes.
However, as soon as the principal saw the student, she burst out at her in front of everyone
present. The first question the principal threw at her was “Where is your boyfriend?” “Go bring
your boyfriend, right now.” The girl was shocked to hear all this. She was not aware of what had
been going on in her absence. She could not speak a single word. Then the principal ordered the
student to pack up her things, and leave the dorm. She was, no longer allowed to stay there.
However, she was allowed to continue her studies at the college. The student could not face
staying in the college after experiencing such humiliation and left never to return.
Principals’ responses to the vignette
Data from the sample principals’ responses shed light on various aspects of the societal
standards of moral values, professional responsibility of the principals and community’s
expectations from them. It was interesting to note that there was a clear difference in how
principals thought about the issue at hand, and how the contextual realities would shape their
decisions.
The first question in the interview protocol sought the principals’ reaction to the case.
Significantly, almost all the principals disapproved the way the principal reacted towards the
112
student in the vignette. However, they all agreed that the principal had to act in a context where
she had to be strict in dealing with such matters. One principal opined,
I think that was quite a natural reaction of the principal, because the principal was acting
in the context of a conservative society…. The first reaction of the principal: where is
your boyfriend, is I think stereotyping this kind of incident.
Commenting on the incident another principal asserted, “it is a true picture of our
society,” for “we do not tolerate such kinds of relationship, either girlfriend or boyfriend.”
Another principal opined, “When we come across such situations, it is not altogether fiction. It is
a day to day situation and we principal do encounter these things.” Moreover, one of the sample
principals thought that the principal in the case was “highly judgmental in concluding that since
she was away the principal thought she was with a boyfriend.”
However, commenting on the changing values and concepts in the society, one principal
stated, “The world is changing, the society is changing, and I believe the values are changing. If
a person is covered in burqah, top to toe, this should not be considered as a signature of
modesty.” This is a powerful comment, which reflects a general mindset of the society that
covering oneself, especially for women, is a fundamental way of maintaining modesty and moral
standards of the society. However, it is no more so. Although many women still clothe
themselves in burqah because of religious beliefs, it does not guarantee the maintenance of the
modesty for others. Therefore, the principal in the vignettes asked the girl about her boyfriend
despite that fact that she was a staunch Muslim (covered in burqah). Furthermore, talking about
the consequences for a girl who goes against the societal values of not having a relationship with
boys, one principal stated,
I think for girls in our society it becomes a major issue. People try to defame them.
They try to make fun of their relationships and they talk about such kind of relations.
Suppose after few years, if a person is proposing to that girl, the people in the community
113
will make trouble for that person. They say: look, this girl had some relations with
Mr. X so you should not propose to this girl. You should not select this girl as your life
partner.
Therefore, all principals expressed that even though they believed in girls’ rights, of “free
will, and choice” they would want the girls to follow society’s values. For instance, one principal
asserted, “I would like all my students to honor the society’s values, even if they go against the
personal whims and wishes of the students. I would like my students to follow the rules in the
context in which they are living.”
The parents’ expectations from the principals also suggest that they have to take
responsibility for providing safety to the girls by making strict rules in the school in general and
dorms in particular. One principal shared, “parents tell us: Please don’t let our daughters go
anywhere, for they don’t want to hear bad things about their daughters.” Therefore, one principal
asserted, “the rules should not be for the sake of rules. There can be sensitivity to a particular
culture and we cannot totally go against the culture in developing rules for the school.” The
principal further shared his encounter of difficulties in organizing
… a tournament for girls to play outside the school. The community simply refused. The
people of the region thought that that was not acceptable behavior for the girls.
Therefore, we had to confine it to our hostel [dorm] premises. In addition, even in one
instance, [we were] not able to arrange a girls’ volleyball tournament.
For this principal, it was beyond his comprehension as to why society imposed such
restrictions especially on women. He asserted,
I totally disagree with the way the society deals with women in Pakistan generally. I
really do not understand why girls cannot play outside in any playground. Why should
they not be part of every professional field? Why should they be compelled to wear a
particular dress? I think in my point of view ethics should not be linked to those cosmetic
things.
114
However, for another principal, his professional responsibilities included following
society’s values as he asserted,
I believe I am a representative of the society, so I cannot go on working on my own
wishes. I need to follow a certain ethical framework. That ethical framework is defined
by the context in which I am working. I have certain obligations; I need to fulfill those
obligations.
The principals also shared their experiences of facing situations involving gender issues.
One sample principal shared his experiences of how such cases or similar incidents were
expected to be dealt. He said, “Whenever we have found such relations among or between
students, many of the teachers and community members in the society have complained about
those relations and interactions. The following interaction between the principal and students,
who were involved in a similar case, is indicative of how such matters were dealt with strictness.
Two students (girl and a boy) were caught up talking to each other and were reported by the
teachers.
I asked him to tell me why he was standing with the girl or his colleague. He said, there is
nothing special between us. We are friends. I asked, is this friendship allowed in your
school or in your culture? He was very afraid of the question and unable to answer it. He
said, sir, you are right; I should not stand with the girl or any other girl. I will take care
next time. Then I called the girl, and asked her the same questions. She was shaking, too,
and I asked her to concentrate on her studies.
Yet in another case, the principal had to record the conversation of some other students
as evidence and reprimanded them to stop whatever they were saying. According to the
principal, “it was something not acceptable in our culture. They were saying that they were
missing each other so much they were not concentrating on their studies, and they love each
other.” When the principal reprimanded the boy, he “was very aggressive” and said, “What you
do mean sir? She is my class fellow.” In order to deal with such a “serious issue” the principal
had to ask them to call their parents, or he would call them. When the principal mentioned
115
parents, the students were afraid and requested “Sir, please forgive us: it will not happen again.”
Then the principal asked them to have their discussions within the limitations, and allowed them
to discuss the academic things briefly.”
There could be multiple reasons why the principals dealt with the situation that way.
Firstly, it was the pressure of the teachers and community, who would disapprove of such
interactions or any of interaction between a girl and a boy. Secondly, the principal’s reprimand
for the girl was out of concern, as he was aware of the consequences of such interactions to her.
Girls are under more scrutiny for their actions, and they face the issues for their future as well as
their lives.
Vignette 2: Teacher marries his student
This incident took place at a girl’s school run by a large development network in the
Northern Areas of Pakistan. Mrs. Murad (principal of the school) received a call at 10:30 pm,
from a person who broke the news that one of the male teachers at the school had married a
student of grade 10. Mrs. Murad could not believe what she heard. The board meeting was due in
two days and expected to have a tough time with the board members. In the meeting, after a
heated debate, it was decided that all male teachers would be fired as they were no more
trustworthy and reliable, and such incident should not occur again. Moreover, they came up with
a policy that no more male teachers would be employed in that school. Mrs. Murad was shocked
and tried to explain and give a justification for the decision, however to no avail. They asked
Mrs. Murad to let the male teachers go and arrange for female teachers by any means. Mrs.
Murad left the meeting and went home with a heavy heart and mind. It was a difficult juncture
for her. Either it was a matter of firing all male teachers or it was a matter of students’ education,
for it was not possible at all to replace so many teachers in a short period and national exams
116
were approaching. She spent a wakeful night. Then she made a decision based on a rationale that
even if she resigned, the board members were still going to implement their decision.
Principals’ responses to the Vignette
The sample principals commented on the incident and their statements were helpful in
shedding light on many issues pertaining to values in the society and their interference with
school matters. The first question in the interview sought their reaction about the vignette in
general. Almost all the principals agreed that the BOG’s decision was irrational and not ethical.
For instance, one principal opined, “if marrying a student is not an acceptable behavior, firing all
the male teachers because of the mistake of one is not a more equally unethical decision.” At the
same time, they felt that they would not like the incident to happen, at least in their schools. One
principal commented, “I would like this incident not to happen in my school, by any means.”
Another principal asserted, “I would not have personally liked the incident. I would not have
been very happy being the principal of that school at the time the incident took place.”
Furthermore, the principals’ responses also revealed why they would not want the
incident at their schools. For instance, “it is dealt as if it is a sin…in our society the teacher is
considered to be a spiritual father, and we consider our students as children.”Therefore, although
“it could be a personal choice of the teacher and the student, more important the issues of safety
and security of girl and teacher in a rigid society.” Principals also talked about the importance of
having a school culture in which the principals ensure the implementation of school policies in
terms of maintaining ethical values. For instance, one principal asserted, “it is very important to
develop such culture in the school that principal consistently remind the teachers of cultural
values and should monitor teachers.” Another principal seemed to endorse the point:
117
When a person is hired to work as a teacher at a school, especially a girl’s school, then
the principal and the teacher should have a discussion as to what the moral
requirements and where the boundaries are, religious, the social: all sorts of things need
to be discussed in detail.
Further, the principal opined,
the students are young, and they are teenagers, they do not understand many things.
There could be many reasons why a student may be attracted to a teacher, but it is a teacher’s
responsibility to have that important gape or distance between the student and himself
…because it is a very sacred relationship.
Another principal shared his strategies of how he monitors teachers and students’
interaction. He stated, “In our professional session, if I see something with which I am not happy
I indirectly indicate that how to sit with our students, how we should talk avoiding unnecessary
contact with students.” An interesting point of view arose when a principal stated, “it is not
prohibited in Islam, but it is prohibited in our culture.” It implies that often the cultural
perspectives have a stronger hold on local practices than the teachings of the religion. In other
words, there may not always be a congruity between cultural and religious practices. Religion
may provide freedom but culture may be rigid.
Moreover, the greatest concern for the principals in the vignette was the quality of
education, as firing all the male teachers would jeopardize teaching and learning. This indicates a
discrepancy between the ways principals and BOG’s take actions. Although the incident presents
an ethical issue, the consequences of firing all the male teachers would create practical issues for
principals. One principal expressed, “many things in school do happen, which as I understand,
must not be taken to the board and sometimes the board messes up the things more than solving
the problems.” The principal’s assertion illustrated limitations for principals when dealing with
serious gender issues.
118
Section III
Synthesis of data from phase I & II
This is the synthesis of data obtained from the interviews conducted at phases one and
two. Phase one consisted of the vignettes I shared to seek their responses and phase two
consisted of the stories principals shared with me. I took five representative stories to explain
their dilemmas and supplemented with other data. The following parts of this section discuss this
synthesis.
The data from interviews 1 supplemented with the themes emerging from the data from
phase two. For instance, the theme “pressure of cultural/religious mores: unwritten rules” echoed
in their responses to the vignettes. The data from the first interview confirmed that there is a
immense pressure of cultural/ religious mores on school matters and principals’ decisions. This is
significant mainly because even though the principals’ personal values differ from what the
society in general holds, the principals cannot go beyond the limitations placed by the societal
values. For example, one principal, despite his personal preferences to have a girls’ tournament,
found it hard to convince the community about the importance of such activities for quality
education.
Hence, the dealing with gender issues was the most sensitive matter in the school
emerging from the interviews at phases I & II. The principals followed “unwritten rules” when
faced with gender issues because they felt that they had no choice but to adhere to these rules
religiously, not only to resolve the situation on the spot, but also make it an example for others to
dread and fear consequences. For examples, the principals cited instances when it was hard for
them to arrange a girls’ tournament because of the community’s values and social norms. In
another instance, the principal in the interviews at phase I described that parents expect the
119
principals to be stricter with girls so that the girls are not allowed to go out unnecessarily.
Moreover, principals expressed their concerns for the girls more than the boys did as girls’
actions receive more scrutiny than their male counterparts do. Therefore, principals made sure
that when they hired teachers they talked to them about the cultural norms and values in terms of
interaction between these and their girl students.
Another aspect confirmed by the principals’ responses to the vignettes was the
incongruity between the organizational bureaucracy and local needs. One principal’s comments
about the BOG’s role in school matters reflect how bureaucratic process hinders principals from
making practical decisions based on situational need. For instance, the principals expressed that
often the BOG’s decisions are influenced by the parents’ demands and hence are often
contradictory to school realities. The principal’s story, in which principal had to compromise on
his decision of punishing the boy for harassing the girl, provided a glimpse of such a situation. In
addition, the community expects from the principals that they do their best to impart quality
education: however, the bureaucratic processes within the organization limit principals’
authorities to decide.
Shapiro & Stefkovich (2011) state, “there may be clashes between a leader’s personal and
professional codes of ethics and custom and practices set forth by the community (i.e., either the
professional community, the school community, or the community where the educational leader
works)” (p.24). However, in the context of Pakistan, there may be many reasons why these
clashes arise while making a decision. Firstly, there might be gaps between principals’ personal
values enlightened by the educational experience, professional practices and the wider
community practices. Principals operate in a modern or postmodern era of how things should
function due to their education, professional development, and up dated knowledge of how
120
schooling should be done.
On the contrary, the community members function from pre-modern perspectives, which
include but are not limited to preferential treatments and a bureaucratic mindset that believes in
the use of influence to get things done. Thus, there seems to be an intellectual and value gap
between principals and communities where these schools are situated in the Pakistani context,
which also creates a unique dimension to their work. On one hand, they have to create a space
for personal adjustments by wading through the waters, which hold a strong bureaucratic
mindset. On the other hand, principals have to adopt a role of educating the communities they
work for what is a complex task and it could be nerve wrecking at times, as these principals
expressed in their responses.
Thus, in the context of Pakistan, a principal has to interact with all the forces, to make an
ethical decision satisfying personal values, fulfill professional obligations and social
expectations. What is more pertinent is that the principal has to respond to the forces by
creating space for their own personal values because they are viewed as either principals
(professionals) who are required to follow professional or organizational obligations, or as
members of the community expected to follow the general norms of how things should be done.
Creating a space for personal values amidst the internal and external forces is a complex process
that may lead to feelings of “frustrations, helplessness, and pain” as articulated by some of the
principals in the study. An ethical decision in the presence of so many complex forces is not a
luxury but rather repugnance carrying serious consequences and implications.
121
Chapter 6
Discussion and Implications
Ethical leadership literature in school leadership presents ethics as a tool or structure to
facilitate leaders’ decisions. However, the nature of that structure varies across cultures because
of the socio-cultural and structural contexts in which principals’ work. Principals in Pakistan
work in a setting where cultural or religious values/beliefs, social norms/mores, and
political/historical practices interfere with how principals go about making decisions to resolve
ethical challenges. Principals in the U.S. may also have to interact with similar forces but
historical legacies may account for deep differences. Hence, this study taking, a comparative
stance on ethical leadership and aims at explaining socio-cultural and structural contexts that
shape ethical decision for principals in these two contexts.
Since, ethics and its meanings are socially constructed, it is imperative to understand
differences and divergences to utilize ethical leadership research in knowledge generating
societies, as in the United States, Canada, Australia, and United Kingdom. However, the
knowledge (using ethics to improve school leadership practices) generated in these societies
focuses on their own educational needs and improvement needed areas, so these may not be
applicable in other societies, particularly, in Pakistan where social, cultural, political and
religious dimensions differ from the western context. Therefore, the conceptual framework of
this study takes culture at societal and organizational (school) levels as a main variable, which
influences principals’ leadership practice within the school, for it provides a useful lens to
explore “influences and practices endemic to educational administration” (Walker 2003, p.150).
Furthermore, to achieve the purpose of my research study I collected data at two stages.
Data, at the first stage, comprised library and electronic resources for empirical studies about
122
principals’ work in Pakistan and United States. The second stage consisted of primary data
through in depth interviews. The data revealed findings at two levels. Firstly, it highlighted the
divergences between the contexts of Pakistan and United States. Secondly, it develops a picture
and an understanding of ethical conflicts for principals in Pakistan.
In this regard, this chapter presents three sections. The first section revolves around a
discussion about ethical conflicts faced by Pakistani principals. Section II presents a comparative
glance at socio-cultural and structural contexts defining principals’ ethical practices in Pakistan
and United States. Lastly, I will present implications of my research.
Section 1: Discussion
A multipolar environment
In general, data revealed that the school principals in Pakistan work in a multipolar
environment, which gives a unique meaning to principals’ ethics and their ethical practices. The
multipolar environment consists of structural context of schools, socio-cultural context
(local/traditional and regional) and a global. Hence, principals in Pakistan are pulled in different
directions. Each direction has its conflicting demands creating dilemmas. The following figure
highlights various contextual realities that interfere with principals’ decision-making processes.
Figure6: A Multipolar Environment
Socio-cultural
context (local
tradition/religiou
s norms/mores)
Global
context
Structural
context within
organization/sc
hool
Principals
123
Socio-cultural context
The data suggest that the socio-cultural forces come into play at various levels in schools
e.g issues related to students, teachers, parents and other administrative affairs as well as
principals’ values by which they construct their decisions. Pakistani society, in general, and
local traditions, in particular, have created framework of ethical standards that defines the
parameters of social practices. The moral standards and social norms include but are not limited
to girls/women’s behavior in public with opposite sex as well as teachers and students and
principals’ moral behavior with other staff and the public.
Culturally and socially, girls are expected to be modest in their activities and under more
scrutiny as their actions serve as bellwethers for family honor and shame. Any interaction
between girls and boys may lead to serious consequences for girls. Therefore, principals,
especially those principals who work in coeducational schools have to be extra careful to prevent
anything that involves fraternization between male teachers and girl students as well as between
girls and boys. Therefore, principals expressed their concerns about gender issues in their
schools because the community’s moral standards of modesty for girls also interfere with how
the curricular and co curricular activities can be carried out. Principals shared their concern that
if they did not take care of the cultural and societal values, then “the reputation of the school”
and even the existence of the school can be in jeopardy because the communities get so outraged
that they can close the schools.
Thus, the socio-cultural norms guided principals’ strategies to monitor and manage
interaction between teachers and their female students. The principals would talk to the teachers
about their school policies; remind them about their roles as not only teachers but also “spiritual
parents” and the sacredness of their relationships to their students. Schools are a reflection of
124
what happens in the larger context, and hence are places to reinforce the wider cultural
perspectives. However, it is pertinent to note that the sacredness of the relationship between
teacher and student was most obvious in girls’ schools. Principals seem to focus on this aspect
when coming to discussing gender issues.
Moreover, although the principals in the study stood fast on their personal values of right
and wrong and ethics of justice, the decisions were not easy for them. The principals received
extreme threats. In the Pakistani society, people who have power and position have a way of
using their influences. Schools are no exception, especially the ones that have a reputation for
imparting the best education. Powerful people consider it their right to have their children
enrolled in these schools by default. On one hand, the principals are expected, by the
organization, to adhere to the rules: however, the community often uses coercion in order to have
the principals meet its demands. When there is a choice of merit then principals’ life may be in
danger. This means, working with the values of fairness and merit becomes a critical question.
Therefore, when principals decide to adhere to the ethics of justice and fairness, the social norms
of preferential treatment and demand for a personalistic behavior create a void with principals’
practices, making it almost impossible for them to enforce ethics.
In addition, data illustrated regionalism as another concept used to force the principals to
overlook merit policies. The literature in chapter 3 (context of Pakistan) suggests that loyalty to
their regions, races, and tribes is given greatest importance. People use the region as a basis to
manipulate power and resources and the data illustrated similar situations for principals who
were working in regions other than their own. The concept of regionalism suggests that people
who come from outside are less deserving of authority, as they might not be loyal to their
benefits. In other words, personal views over-ride merit, potential and individuality.
125
Structural Context
Chapter 2 refers to the institutional, organizational or school culture. Structural context
can be described as democratic or bureaucratic depending on how the processes are carried out.
The structural context of my research sites could be described as having two tiers of a culture
because these schools are part of a large development network. A hierarchy governs the day-to-
day business. At one level, management consisting of a general manager (GM) responsible to
oversee the entire organizations running more than hundred schools in Gilgit- Balitistan or on
another level, a board of governors (BOG) an honorary arrangement responsible for addressing
community problems and consisting community representatives, the GM of the organization, and
principal of the school.
However, principals’ discretion and authority is limited in the presence of such a
hierarchy in two ways. Firstly, the higher management approves the budget of the school. The
principal despite having firsthand knowledge and experience of where the money should be used
has less authority to propose or approve budgets. As a result, the principals are challenged to find
competent and qualified human resources that contribute to the quality of teaching/ learning and
improvement of the entire school. Secondly, the BOG’s involvement in decisions about school
matters also hampers the process because often its decisions tend to meet the needs of the culture
rather than needs of the school.
Global context
Global context comes into play indirectly. The principals often receive their professional
trainings in light of western research and scholarship. When principals try to adopt or adapt
western theories of school leadership, they find a disconnect between their realities and theories.
For instance, teamwork is considered as one of the best practices for leaders. However, such a
126
notion leads to frustration when applied in a context highly bureaucratic and hierarchical. One
principal expressed his opinion that in order to have the teamwork, he had to suspend his own
decisions, even, if he were right because teachers would not accept non-traditional views.
Similarly, the international views about quality education, gender equality and notions of
best interest of the students would often collide with the local, traditional and cultural
values/beliefs and norms, creating a conflict in exerting their responsibilities. The schools and
principal strive to impart quality education and achieve gender equality because of the global
emphasis on these aspects. However, it takes more energy, time and resources to put these into
practice.
Schools maintain legitimacy by mimicking norms at local, organizational, regional and
global levles. However, global legitimacy may not be the highest priority as much as are the
local, organizational and regional. The biggest clash, for the principals, is to acquire legitimacy
at the local level within formal educational system by creating a balance between varying
degrees of demands and expectations, and formal/ professional responsibilities. The conflicts that
emerge from the varying demands, expectations, and constraints interfere greatly to construct
and implement ethical decisions. Firstly, the schools have a major purpose of imparting quality
education. Merit was meant to be a prime objective, yet it conflicted with communities’
practices. The principals were responsible and expected to achieve the schools’ objectives, yet
the influential members of the community want to exercise power over the principals.
Secondly, the communities in which these schools were located believed in gender
equality. Therefore, the schools offered opportunities for both girls and boys, as opposed to some
other communities in the region. However, when it comes to moral standards, and social norms,
women/ girls are under more scrutiny for their actions and so are the principals who work at
127
those schools. The principals are expected to maintain and ensure social norms by formalizing
policies. This creates a conflict as it curtails some of the creative activities for girls. The
principals are limited in what they can do and how they can carry out co-curricular activities.
Nevertheless, the co-curricular activities are an important part of good quality education. It
seems that each activity, in girls’ schools or co educational schools, is measured/judged against
the social norms and has to be curtailed even if a healthy and necessary part of their education.
Thirdly, principals are considered responsible for taking care of the schools at the
organizational level but when it comes to making a decision regarding teachers’ evaluations,
budgetary matters and other administrative affairs, they are limited in their discretion in acting.
They are granted high responsibility but with limited authority/ discretion. Fourthly, the
organization has set up these schools with a special focus of imparting quality teaching/ learning.
However, the provision of insufficient financial resources has constrained principals’ efforts to
achieve the school’s objectives. Lastly, principals’ professional trainings and their learning about
the western theories of the best leadership practices collide with the fundamental realities of the
school and community practices. Their efforts to adopt or adapt these theories result in
frustration, confusion, and in many cases risks and severe consequences as was evident from the
data. Thus, it can be said that the ethical decision-making is not a luxury for principals in
Pakistan as it may be for principals in United States. Principals in Pakistan have to work against
the backdrop of many contradictions and conflicts. They are pulled in many directions, yet are
responsible for creating a balance between achieving the objective of good quality education and
maintaining social norms.
128
Section II
Comparative analysis of socio-cultural and structural contexts
The study yields a comparative analysis at various levels, which are discussed below.
This comparative analysis is necessary to draw future research implications. This comparative
analysis is drawn from local and the international levels.
Firstly, the study presents a stark contrast in the socio-cultural contexts between Pakistan
and United States. There is an absence of strict social norms in U.S whereas strict social norms
dictate Pakistani society in general and different communities in particular. Hence, schooling is
segregated, with distinct expectations and demands for girls and boys. The principals, at girls’
schools or co educational schools, are more concerned with maintaining social norms of modesty
for girls. Their school polices are framed in a way that the interaction between male teachers and
girls is limited to class and to academics outside the class. Moreover, the principals ensure that as
soon as they hire a teacher they must orient the teacher with the values and expectations of
maintaining the cultural norms of morality. It is a constant pressure for the principals working at
such schools not to let anything ruin the reputation of their school. On the other hand, in the
U.S., social norms are not strict: rather, there is much variability in them. Higher levels of
acceptance of a variety of practices and higher level of tolerance for different ways of life
provide a room for principals to focus on academics and performance within the schools.
Moreover, the norms of freedom and equality fit with the western structure of ethics i.e respect
for individuals. In Pakistan, norms attempt to preserve the family and cultural/traditional mores
of maintaining family honor as collectivistic approach operates in that society rather than to
individualistic approach.
Secondly, consequences for error are much higher in Pakistan. The whole idea of co-
129
educational schools and even the whole idea of girls going to school in some parts of the country
may bring serious consequences for girls. Again, the probability of consequences for women is
higher than for men. Hence, the principals are more concerned about following social norms, but
nothing like that prevails in the United State. There are certainly consequences of principals for
making mistakes; usually they do not involve a closing of a school or taking of a life, as may
happen in Pakistan.
Principals in the U.S. may be accountable for not following the policy rigidly but in
Pakistan, they are accountable for following the policies. In. U.S. principals can get away with
not following demands of community: in Pakistan, the cost of disobedience is higher especially
if it is disobedience to regional, tribal, or religious leaders or forces.
Thirdly, principals in Pakistan work with people who are unevenly educated and they
work against a backdrop of traditions and cultural-religious beliefs. In today’s America,
principals are much more buffered from the public. There is a higher demand for the safety and
security of the school and everyone working in it. Hence, no one can get into school or walk to
the principals’ office without a prior permission. In Pakistan, especially in the case of Northern
Areas, anyone who is angry can walk into the school or principal’s office.
Lastly, in the United States there is also a tradition of local control, which to some extent
buffers principals from higher ups. The decisions get to be made at the school, l or district level.
However, principals in Pakistan work in a hierarchical environment that lends less discretion for
decision making at the school level. Principals work not only in a highly bureaucratic system but
also a mindset that mandates hierarchy and a bureaucracy.
Another riveting contrast can be made in the general societal culture between Pakistan
and the U.S. The principals in the U.S. have enormous pressure in the form of “zero tolerance
130
policy” that requires the elimination of presence of weapons of any shape, size and type. This
implies that the students have a tendency to bring weapons to the schools. The Pakistani
principals in the study did not mention any such issues requiring them to stop students from
bringing weapons. This is noteworthy for a basic reason. Pakistan as a country is, politically,
known for terrorism and killings internationally, yet there is no sign that students bring weapons
to the school to kill their fellow students or teachers. The school is respected as a sacred place.
Secondly, the nature of threats that the principals received for making ethical decisions
also presented a gender difference. The male principals were sometimes threatened to be beaten
up in the market, whereas the woman principal received threats to have strange people around
her school and have the water cut off. In other words, in the case of male principals, only the
principal himself was in danger or at risk, whereas, in the case of the female principal, the entire
school was in danger or at risk.
Thus, it can be said that since, ethics are socially constructed and contested, they derive
from local norms, and vary from the local to global levels. Socially constructed ethics is different
from the ethical parameters or moral commandments of an organization to oblige its employees
or school members. There is a plenty of room between “ethics of the profession,” traditional
ethics and traditional concepts of morality. In the context of Pakistan all these ethics differ
significantly. Inherently, there is a difference in the concepts of ethics promoted by
cultural/traditional beliefs and those of ethics promoted by religion. For instance, one may
believe in gender equality as a teaching of religion, but cultural beliefs of difference in gender
status will lead to practices of gender inequality. Hence, often religion is interpreted through a
cultural lens that blurs the boundaries between the concepts of ethics taught by religion and
ethics derived from culture of traditional beliefs.
131
However, in societies where there is a focus on ethics of the profession, principals have a
convenience to play around traditional or cultural practices of ethics as is in the case of United
States. Principals work in a safer environment than principals in Pakistan do. Their discretion to
make decisions grants them space to utilize their personal values/beliefs of “justice, care,
critique” and professional beliefs of “ethics of the profession.”
Section III
Implications
The study was carried out at a small scale as a first step to explaining the school principals’ work
in Pakistan. Therefore, the implications cannot be generalized in terms of its actual findings, yet
the findings can contribute to an understanding of a general context in which principals’ work is
embedded. Hence, the finding of the study provides implications at various levels (i.e school
principals, policy makers and future research).
Implications for principals
The study establishes importance of in depth analysis of problems/issues/ dilemmas
facing principals in the context of Pakistan in terms of their ethical implications for students,
teachers and parents. An awareness of the importance of the decision for principals becomes
significant because many of the problems that principals face have “pervasive ethical overtones”
and resolution of these problems is only possible through a “…proper attention to the complex
ethical dilemmas that surround these issues” (Burroghs 1970, p.105). Although, unlike schools in
United States, principals do not engage in discussions about the moral issues and decision-
making in Pakistan, the opportunities such as workshops/ seminars may be utilized to engage
them in such discussions. Moreover, the ethical deliberations lead to reflections on some of the
sensitive issues prevailing not only in the school but also in the society because ethical standards
132
in the society influence actions and responses of the school community.
Implications for Policy makers
There has been a growing awareness about the importance of the role of principal for
school development in Pakistan (Khaki, 2005) and attention is paid to train school heads to
develop their leadership skills. However, trainings revolve around administrative aspects of the
leadership practices. Often these trainings are insufficient to provide the principals with a
framework for guiding their actions in uncertain, unexpected and unknown situations. When
such unexpected situations arise, principals would react according to what they consider “right.”
Often what they consider right depends upon their own leadership orientation as well as personal
beliefs.
In addition, it is expected that school leaders will act morally and ethically because they
are responsible for the care of students and school. Hence, principals’ decisions are often
influenced by societal or community standards of morality and expectations. Therefore, this
study is expected to lead to a way to focus on ethical dimensions of their leadership practices, so
that they are able to make informed decisions.
The literature emphasizes the ethical training aspect in leadership preparation through
various ways. For instance, in order to provide opportunities for principals to understand their
values and beliefs, Shapiro and Stefkovich (2011) advocate the use of “life stories, and critical
incidents” as a source of learning about their “professional as well as personal codes” (p.23) of
ethics. Dempster, Freakley, & Parry. (2001) also support, “…use of vignettes of ethical issues in
schooling for the purposes of learning about the processes of applied ethical inquiry” (p.11).
In addition to providing training for school principals, organization should develop
support systems to enable principals become confident in talking about challenges in their
133
decision-making “create[ing] practice analysis groups in order to promote reflection, judgment,
and a sense of responsibility among their leaders” (Langloise & Lapointe 2007, p.258). It is
recommended that collaborative opportunities be provided to the principals in developing an
understanding of ethics in their practices (Denig & Quinn 2001). These collaborative
opportunities may foster “dialogues about ethical situations with peers” (Norberg, & Johansson,
2007, p.289) before embarking on making a decision. Dimmock & Walker (2005), also referring
to Berry (2003), advocate developing ethical perspectives, both formally (the training of
principals in ethical theory) and informally (through peer-based support and collaborative
networks)” (p.178).
Implications for future research
More than a decade ago, Yukl (1998) highlighted a significant gap in leadership research
which the studies did not go into beyond the Western (United States, Canada, Western Europe)
contexts and leadership theories generalized to different cultures. However, the situation has
changed as more and more research arises from different parts of the world. However, the case
remains true to the concept of ethics in educational leadership today.
Most of the “research on principals’ dilemmas has…been confined to Western settings”
(Dimmock & Walker 2005, p.178). Reviewing the existing literature about the lack of research
in educational administration in international settings, Walker (2003) opines, “Anglo-American”
literature dominating the field, may not be suitable and applicable to addressing the needs of a
full international context. Supporting his point, Dimmock & Walker (2005) advocate research
studies that may generate knowledge about what ethical challenges principals experience in other
contexts, as well as how they address those challenges. Hence, this study adds to the existing
research by investigating ethical challenges school principals encounter in Pakistan. This study
134
attempts to bring a different perspective of ethics to educational leadership, which may not only
pave a way for research in this field in that country but also add to the existing knowledge in the
greater field.
Furthermore, the following areas can be explored to further the understanding of ethical
decision making especially in Pakistan.
Comparative analysis of male and female principals’ ethical dilemmas and ethical
decision-making
Comparative analysis between public and private school principals’ ethical decision-
making processes may be investigated to explore a detailed picture of structural
challenges
Principals’ ethical decisions in the context of southern and northern parts of the country
should be explored to develop a comprehensive picture of socio-cultural contexts.
In a nutshell, ethics plays a vital part in school leadership practice as everything that
happens in schools has an ethical implications in one way or the other. If not taken carefully,
decisions may hinder learning processes at various levels. Hence, principals should be aware of
the ethical implications of their decisions to avoid “unnecessary harm” and construct more value-
informed decisions. Moreover, ethics is a culturally and religiously loaded concept, so it is
necessary to help principals with their perspectives of ethics and enhance their understanding of
the concept to be able to reflect on their decisions. What is imperative for principals is to be
equipped with the skills to deal with socio-cultural pressures that interfere with school matters.
The influence and interference of external forces in school matters is inevitable in societies like
135
Pakistan, which believe in a hierarchy of power and bureaucracy.
136
References
Azam, M. (2009). Radicalization in Pakistan: Socio-cultural Realities. Conflict and Peace
Studies, 2 (1), 1-17.
Azhar, T. (2009). Patriarchy, Militarization, and the Gender Gap in Education: The Case of
Pakistan. Unpublished dissertation: The Pennsylvania State University.
Barter, C. & Renold, E. (2000). I wanna tell you a Story: Exploring the application of Vignettes
in Qualitative Research with Children and Young People. International Journal of Social
Research Methodology, 3(4), 307-323.
Begley, P. (2008). The Nature and Specialized Purposes of Educational Leadership. International
Handbook on the Preparation and Development of School Leaders. New York:
Routledge.
Begley, T. (2006). Self-Knowledge, Capacity and Sensitivity: Prerequisites to authentic
leadership by school principals. Journal of Educational Administration, 44 (6), 570-589.
Bhattacharjea,S. (1994). Reconciling ‘Public’ and ‘Private’: Women in the educational
bureaucracy in “Sinjabistan” Province, Pakistan. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis.
Bogdan, R. C. & Biklan, s. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods. Boston: Pearson Education.
Cheong, C.Y. (2000). Cultural Factors in Educational Effectiveness: A Framework for
Comparative Research. School Leadership and Management, 20 (2), 207-225.
Choi, I.(2007). The lived experiences of teachers at a lifelong learning institute: A
Phenomenological study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Penn State University,
137
University Park, PA.
Chughtai, A.A. & Buckley, F. (2009). Linking Trust in the Principal to School Outcome: The
Mediating Role of Organizational Identification and Work Engagement. International
Journal of Educational Management, 23(7), 574-589
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
Dempster,N. & Berry, V. (2003). Blindfolded in a Minefield: Principals’ Ethical Decision
Making. Campbridge Journal of Education, 33 (3), 457-477.
Drew, C.J., Hardman, M.L., & Hosp J.L. (2008). Designing and Conducting Research in
Education. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Farah,I. & Rizvi, S. (2007). Public- private partnership: Implications for primary schooling in
Pakistan. Social Policy & Administration, 41(4), 339-354.
Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 3 (1) 1-26.
Hakim, A., & Aziz A. (1998). Socio-cultural, religious, and political aspects of the status of
women in Pakistan. The Paksitan Development Review, 37 (4) 727-746.
Hallinger, P. & Leithwood, K. (1996). Culture and Educational Administration: A Case of
Finding out What you don’t Know you don’t Know. Journal of Educational Admin
istration, 34 (5), 98-116.
Hallinger, P. (2004). Meeting the Challenges of Cultural Leadership: The Changing Role of
Principals in Thailand. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 25 (1),
61-73. http:// dx.doi.org
138
Harrell, M.C. & Bradley, M.A. (2009). Data collection methods: Semi- structured interviews and
focus groups. Pittsburgh: Rand Corporation.
Henkin, A.B., Cistone, P.J. & Dee, J.R. (1999). Conflict Management Strategies in Site-Based
Managed Schools. Journal of Educational Administration. 38(2), pp. 142-158
Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultur’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and
Organizations Across Nations.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Hoodbhoy, P. (1998). Education and the state: Fifty years of Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford
University Press.
Ishtiaque, M. 2011, Murder in the name of honor, published in The News: November 2011
Islam, N. (2004). Sifarish, Sycophants, Power and collectivism: Administrative Culture in
Pakistan. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 70 (2). 311-330.
Kersten, T. (2008). Teacher Hiring Practices: Illinois Principals’ Perspectives. The Educational
Forum. 72 (4), 355-368.
Khaki, J.E. (2008). Leading Leaders: A School Leadership Development Experience in Pakistan.
The Sindh University Journal of Education. 38.
Khalid, S.M. & Khan, M.F. (2006). Pakistan: The State of Education. The Muslim World, 96(1),
305-322.
Khan, A. (2012). Instructional management of a private and a government secondary school
principal in Northern Pakistan. International journal of educational development. 32(1),
pp. 120-131
Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
139
Lauer, P.A. (2006). An education research primer: how to understand, evaluate, and use it. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Education Series.
Leonard, P.E. (1999). Examining Educational Purposes and Underlying Value Orientations in
Schools. In Begley, T. (ed.) Values and Educational Leadership. New York: State
University of New York.
Malik, I.H.(2006). Culture and customs of Pakistan. Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (2011). Designing qualitative research. Los Angeles: Sage.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research: Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
McMillan, J.H. (2000). Educational research: fundamentals for the consumer (3rd ed.). New
York: Longman.
Merriam, S.B. & Associates (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussions
and analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Oduro, G., Dachi, H., Fertig,M. & Rarieya, J. (2007). Examining educational leadership and
quality in developing countries. EdQual: A Research Programme Consortium on
Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries.
Philips, D. (2006). Comparative Education: Method. Research in Comparative and International
Education, 1(4),304-319.
140
Qadeer, M.A. (2006). Pakistan: Social and cultural transformations in a Muslim nation. New
York: Routledge.
Raivola, R. (1985). What is comparison? Methodological and philosophical considerations.
Comprative Eduation Review, 29 (3), 362-374. www.jstor.org
Rebore, R. W. (2001). The ethics of educational leadership. Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Nanji A. (2006). The ethical traditions in Islam. www.iis.ac.uk.
Rizvi,M. (2008). The role of school principals in enhancing teacher professionalism: Lessons
from Pakistan. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36 (1) 85-100.
Rubin, H.J. & Rubin, I.S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
Sajoo, A. B. (2004). Muslim Ethics: Emerging Vistas. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers in
association with the Institute of Ismail Studies London.
Salfi, N.A. & Saeed, M. (2007). Relationship among school size, school culture and students
achievement at secondary level in Pakistan. International Journal of Educational
Management, 21(7), 606-620.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and
the social science. New York: Teacher College Press.
Shapiro, J.P., & Stefkovich, J.A. (2011). Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education:
Applying Theoretical Perspectives in Complex Dilemmas. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
141
Siddiqui, A. (1997). Ethics in Islam: Key concepts and contemporary challenges. Journal of
Moral Education, 26 (4) 423-431.
Simkins, T., Garrett,V., Memon, M. & Ali, R.N. (1998).The Role Perceptions of Government
and Non-Government Headteachers. Educational Management, Administration and
Leadership, 26(2), 131-146.
Shah, S. (2006). Educational Leadership: An Islamic perspective. British Educational Research
Journal, 32 (3). 363-385.
Stefkovich, A.J. (2006). Best Interests of the Students: Applying Ethical Constructs to Legal
Cases in Education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Talibani, A. (1996). Pedagogy, Power, and Discourse: Transformation of Islamic Education.
Comparative Education Review 40 (1)66-82.
Triandis, H.C. & Berry, J.W. (198) Methodology: Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, INC.
Upadhyay, B., Barton, A.C., & Zahur, R. (2005). Teaching Science in a poor urban school in
Pakistan: Tensions in the life history of a female elementary teacher. Wiley Interscience.
Weiss, R.S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies.
New York: The Free Press.
Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing: biographic narrative and semi-structured
methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
142
Appendix A
Two Tier Interview Format: Vignettes & Protocol
Phase I: Interview 1
The moral dilemmas for this interview were constructed based on true stories in the context of Pakistan.
The stories were presented with necessary details and brevity.
Vignette 1: Student’s Absence
This incident took place at one of the colleges for girls situated in an urban area in Pakistan. The college had a
dormitory for students who came from far off places. The dorm had strict rules and regulations for students’ visitors.
Shahida (pseudonym) was a student in her third year of studies who lived in the dorm because her parents lived
abroad. She was a devout Muslim and covered herself from head to toe according to her religious beliefs. One day
the warden discovered that Shahida did not return after the weekend. Although, the woman, she left with had signed
her out and was her friend, she was not a registered guardian. This created a stir among the boarding staff. The
warden decided to inform the principal of the matter immediately.
The principal became furious. The next morning the principal arrived and asked other students if they knew
anything about her. Meanwhile, the girl arrived to attend her classes. However, as soon as the principal saw the
student, she burst out at her in front of everyone present. The first question the principal threw at her was “Where is
your boyfriend?” “Go bring your boyfriend, right now.” The girl was shocked to hear all this. She was not aware of
what was going on in her absence. She could not speak a single word. Then the principal ordered the student to pack
up her things, and leave the dorm. She was, no longer allowed to stay there. However, she was allowed to continue
her studies at the college. The student could not stay in the college either after experiencing such humiliation and
left never to be seen.
Questions
What is your first reaction to the case?
Do you agree with the principal’s decision? Why? / Why not?
If you were the principal, how would you deal with this situation? How would you go about making a
professional decision?
143
What principles would guide your actions?
Why would you use those principals to guide your actions?
Vignette 2: Teacher marries his student
This incident took place at a girl’s school run by a large development network in the Northern Areas of Pakistan.
Mrs. Murad (principal of the school) received a call at 10:30 pm, from a person who broke the news that one of the
male teachers at the school had married a student of grade 10. Mrs. Murad could not believe what she heard. The
board meeting was due in two days and expected to have a tough time with the board members. After a heated
debate, it was decided that all male teachers would be fired as they were no more trustworthy and reliable, and such
incident should not occur again in the future. Moreover, they came up with a policy that no more male teachers
would be employed in that school. Mrs. Murad was shocked and tried to explain and give a justification against the
decision, however to no avail. They asked Mrs. Murad to let the male teachers go and arrange for female teachers by
any means. Mrs. Murad left the meeting and went home with a heavy heart and mind. It was a difficult juncture for
her. On one hand, it was a matter of firing whole bunch of male teachers; on the other hand, it was a matter of
students’ education because it was not possible at all to replace so many teachers in a short period and national
exams were approaching. She spent the night awake. Then she made a decision based on a rationale that even if she
resigned the board members were still going to implement their decision.
Questions
What is your first reaction to the case?
If you were in place of Mrs. Murad, how would you deal with the situation? How would you go about
making a professional decision?
What would be your major concern in this case?
What do you think the principal should have done?
Do you think the incident could have been prevented? Why/ why not
Phase II: Interview 2
Part 1: Introductory questions
1- To begin with, can you tell me a little bit about yourself?
2- Is there a job manual that describes your professional responsibilities? If yes, what does it say? If not,
why not? How do you determine what your responsibilities are?
3- You are a principal of one of the most important schools in the region. How does this make your role
as a principal different from principals in other schools in the region?
144
Part 2: Major section
1- In your current position as a school principal, have you ever faced/experienced a situation that created
difficult ethical issues? (Probe to question 1)
- Tell me more about that experience.
- What were the circumstances?
- How did you deal with the situation?
- What were the issues?
- How did you make a decision? What did you decide? What was the result?
- Did you seek help or advice? If so how? From whom? If not, why not?
- Do you think that was the only way you could deal with the situation?
- If you face the same situation today, how would you react/ how would your decision be different?
2- Have you ever experienced a conflict over following a school policy, institutional procedure or
professional/social expectation that you believed was morally questionable?
- What was the situation?
- Why did you think it was questionable?
- How did you resolve the conflict?
- How did you come up with that resolution?
3- Have you ever faced/ experienced a situation when what you believed was right personally was different
from what you thought was expected or the right thing to do professionally?
- What was the situation?
- What was your decision?
- What moral principles guided your decision?
4- In general, how do you approach ethical decisions when you are faced with ethical issues?
- Are there any personal, professional, social guidelines that you follow?
- Do you think facing ethical issues and challenges hinder or facilitate your performance as a principal?
How? Why?/ Why not?
- When you make a decision to resolve an ethical issue/ challenge or problem, is it easy to implement
your decision? How? Why/ Why not?
5- What do you think would be helpful to school administrators facing ethical issues?
6- Have you ever read about “ethical/ moral leadership”? If yes, what is it in your opinion?
- If not, do you think ethics can be part of principal’s professional responsibilities?
Part 3: Closing Questions
1- Is there anything you would like to add or clarify to what has been discussed earlier?
Thank you very much for your participation. I appreciate your time and conversation. I wish you all the
best for your future endeavors in your school!
145
Appendix B
Informed Consent Form
INFORMED CONSENT FOR SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH
The Pennsylvania State University
Title of Project
Comparative Analysis of Socio-Cultural and Structural Contexts that Shape Ethical Decision Making in Pakistan
and USA
Principal Investigator: Mehnaz Jehan, 200 Rackley Bldg. University Park, PA 16802,
814-852-9098, [email protected]
Faculty Advisor: Roger Shouse, 204F Rackley Bldg. University Park, PA 16802
814-863-3773, [email protected]
1- Description of the research study
This study represents a thesis in Educational Leadership that I am conducting as part of my requirement for the
Doctor of Philosophy in Education. The purpose of the study is to learn about secondary school principals’
experiences of ethical challenges in Pakistan. Your participation will promote understanding of principals’
experiences of ethical challenges and improve leadership practices in schools in Pakistan.
If you agree to participate in this study, you will be interviewed individually. You will be asked questions about
your experiences of ethical challenges in your professional life as principals so far. The interviews will last for about
90 minutes. If you grant permission, the personal interviews may be audio taped. You may ask to stop the recording
at any time.
2- Description of your rights as a research participant
You have the right to ask questions and have those questions answered. You may question your interviewer or either
of the investigators listed above.
Non-one other than the principal investigator will have access to the recordings. The information you give us is
confidential. To protect your identity, you will not be identified personally in any way. Although the interviews will
be recorded and some portions may be transcribed, all recordings and transcriptions will be destroyed by June 2015.
Until then, recordings will be kept under lock and key in the office of the investigators listed above. In the event of
publication/presentation of this research, no personally identifying information will be disclosed.
146
Your participation is voluntary. You can stop at any time by notifying the principal investigator. You do not have to
answer any questions you do not want to answer. Your refusal to participate in or withdraw from this study will
involve no penalty or loss of benefits.
Your informed consent to participate
You must be 18 years of age or older to consent to participate in this research study. If you consent to participate in
this research study and to the terms above, please sign your name and indicate the date below.
You will be given a copy of this consent form to keep for your records.
I give my permission to be Audio taped. _________ yes ____________ No
I give my permission for portions of this interview to be directly quoted in publications/ presentations.
__________Yes _________ No
Participant signature Date
I, the undersigned, verify that the above informed consent procedure has been followed.
Investigator Signature Date
MEHNAZ JEHAN
E-mail: [email protected]
Education: Penn State, (2009-2015) – PhD-dual title degree program (Educational
Leadership-Comparative and International Education
Penn State, (2008/2009) – Humphrey Fellowship Program- Educational
Leadership Planning and Policy
Aga Khan University, Pakistan (2002- 2004)
Major: Teacher Education
Concentration: Educational leadership and Management
Punjab University, Pakistan (1994- 1998)
Masters of Arts (M.A) English Literature
Bachelors of Arts (B.A) Education and Political Science
Federal Board Islamabad (1990- 1993)
Higher Secondary School Certificate (HSSC)
Secondary School Certificate (SSC)
Award(s) Humphrey Fellowship: (2008-2009)
Experience Internship: Academy for Educational Development, Washington DC (May
2009- June 2009)
Principal: Aga Khan Higher Secondary School, Hunza (2006 – 2008)
Professional Development Teacher: Aga Khan Higher Secondary School, Gilgit
(2004 -2006)
Taught at: Aga Khan Higher Secondary School, Gilgit (2000- 2006)
Ladybird School, Islamabad, (1999- 2000)
Oxford High School, Islamabad, 1998 - 1999
Conference (s) CIES: The role of NGO in educational development of the developing
countries (2009)
Ethics Conference: Learning for Leadership with Moral Purpose (2009)
Moral Literacy Colloquium: Secondary School Principals’ Experiences of Ethical
Challenges (2011)
CIES: Comparative analysis of socio-cultural and structural contexts that shape
ethical decision making in Pakistan and United States of America (2012)
Special Skills (Languages): Brushaski (first language) Urdu, English
Top Related