Page 36 - Educational Leadership in a Changing World

Rasa Nedzinskait˙ e-Mači¯ unien˙ e and Antonios Kafa

have on their students (Day et al., 2020). This indirect effect on student
outcomes may be observed through school leaders’ practices and styles
that could include support for teachers’ professional development, en-
gagement with external stakeholders, supporting the overall teaching
and learning process, fostering a participative leadership among the in-
ternal stakeholders, etc. (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011).
Nevertheless, the impact of school leadership practices on student
achievement can be influenced by a range of contextual factors, in-
cluding the economic, social, and cultural status (escs) of students
(Hallinger, 2016). Therefore, exploring how these particular factors in-
teract with school leadership practices are important for developing
policies that support students and school effectiveness in general.
Having said that, this chapter seeks to examine the role of escs in
the relationships between instructional leadership, school autonomy,
and students’ science achievement in oecd’s latest pisa cycle. Specif-
ically, the research seeks to determine (1) whether escs moderates the
effects of instructional leadership and school autonomy on student per-
formance and (2) whether escs mediates these relationships. By high-
lighting the mediating and moderating roles of escs, this study offers
valuable insights for policymakers and educators striving to enhance
student learning outcomes through contextually informed leadership
practices.

Theoretical Background
The Role of Contextual Factors and School Leadership
In general, it is highly important to recognize the complexities of the
context in which school leaders operate, as these factors can signifi-
cantly shape their perception and implementation of their leadership
practice. Hallinger (2016) identified various contextual areas that affect
school organizations and play a significant role in shaping and influenc-
ing school leaders’ practices, including the institutional and community
contexts. The institutional context, in particular, is defined by factors
suchasschool sizeand thedegreeofcentralizationwithintheeducation
system (Hallinger, 2016). For instance, centralization affects the vision
and reforms that effective school leaders aim to implement, together
with the school-level autonomy in school organizations. Also, the com-
munity context pertains to the actions of school leaders in the vari-
ous communities where they lead their school organizations (Hallinger,
2016). Based on the above, school leaders’ practices are affected on these

36