Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to identify and compare the leadership orientation frames of high school principals who did and did not apply for California SB 1274 restructuring planning grants. An examination of the effects of moderator variables of age, gender, ethnicity and school size was also employed on the subjects. Methodology. The study used causal comparative and descriptive research. A sample of 265 principals were surveyed; 188 principals responded to Bolman and Deal's Leadership Orientation Survey which ascertained the view or frame that was more dominant among and between the groups of principals. The frames of structural, human resources, political and/or symbolic describe a particular vantage point one takes to view the world which impacts leadership and management. The study also analyzed the effects of gender, age, ethnicity and school size on the various orientations. Data were analyzed using standard deviations, analysis of variance, the t-test and chi-square. Findings. No significant differences were found between the dominant leadership orientation frames. The demographic variables of gender, age, ethnicity and school size had no impact on the four leadership dimensions for principals except principals who applied in the "other" ethnic group indicated a significantly higher use of the political dimension than principals who did not apply. There was no relationship between the moderator variables and the leadership orientations. Conclusions. The data confirm the findings of previous studies and literature which suggest that: (1) high school principals are better managers than leaders; (2) the most dominant leadership orientation is human resources and the least dominant is symbolic; (3) applying or not applying for SB 1274 had no impact on the leadership orientations used. Recommendations. Continue to investigate principal leadership orientations by; (1) broadening the data collection process to include a colleague rating questionnaire and interviews; (2) replicate the study using elementary principals; (3) replicate the study focusing on those who received implementation grants; and (4) conduct a follow-up study to determine if restructuring has occurred and compare the results to the dominant leadership orientation of the principals used in the study.