University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Key stakeholders' role in implementing special education inclusion: leadership and school culture

(USC Thesis Other)

Key stakeholders' role in implementing special education inclusion: leadership and school culture

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 1

KEY STAKEHOLDERS’ ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING SPECIAL EDUCATION INCLUSION:
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE

by

Aida Babayan

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2018

Copyright 2018 Aida Babayan

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 2
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my two sons, their future wives, and grandchildren. Let this
attest to you that it is never too late to pursue your dreams. Education received at any cost is
worthwhile because no one can take it away from you. Always dream big, follow your dreams,
be persistent, and you will achieve!

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation chair Dr. Patricia Tobey for her support and Dr.
Crispen, Dr. Combs, and Dr. Escalante for serving on my committee. Thank you, Dr. Escalante,
for cordially stepping in the last minute to save me. Special thanks to my husband, two sons and
their partners for many words of encouragement through my endeavor. Thanks to my colleagues
for their support and my new friends in the doctoral weekend cohort for believing in me and not
letting me quit during the hard times.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 3
LIST OF TABLES 7
LIST OF FIGURES 8
ABSTRACT 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 10
Background of the Problem 12
Statement of the Problem 14
Purpose of the Study 14
Research Questions 16
The Significance of the Study 16
Definition of Terms 18
Limitations and Delimitations 21
Organization of the Study 23
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 24
What is Inclusion? 24
History of Inclusion 25
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 26
Least Restrictive Environment 27
Successful Inclusion 28
Theoretical Framework 29
Leadership: The Role of Administrators in Inclusion 29
Transformational Leadership Theory 30
How Transformational Leadership Approach Worked 36
Strengths 36
Criticisms 37
High School Principal Support Systems 39
Summary 42
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 44
Research Questions 45
Research Design 45
Sample and Population 45
Participant Profiles 47
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 5
The History of the Inclusion Program 48
Overview of Suburban Unified School District 50
Diamond High School 50
Conceptual Framework 52
Validity 53
Credibility 54
Trustworthiness 54
Data Collection 54
Data Analysis 57
Ethical Consideration 58
Summary 59
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 60
Results 60
Research Question 1 62
Collaborative School Culture 64
Philosophy and Commitment 68
Discussion of Research Question One 72
Research Question 2 73
Institutional Support 74
Instructional Leadership 85
Discussion of Research Question Two 88
Findings 89
Summary 91
Themes Not Explained by the Framework 92
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 94
Purpose of the Study 95
Research Questions 95
Summary of the Findings 96
Finding One: Providing Institutional Support 96
Finding Two: Instructional Leadership 98
Implications for Practice 99
Recommendations for Future Study 100
Conclusions 100
REFERENCES 102
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 6
APPENDIX A Interview Protocol 116
APPENDIX B Informed Consent Form 121
APPENDIX C IRB Approval Letter 124

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Matrix 57
Table 2: Participants’ Demographics 61
Table 3: Participants’ Titles and Experience 61
Table 4: Transformational Leadership Survey 69

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Transformational leadership theory (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). 36
Figure 2: Data collection and triangulation. 56

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 9
ABSTRACT
This qualitative case study investigated the role of transformational leadership theory in
school administrators’ leadership practices in creating and maintaining positive school culture
and practices supporting the inclusion of students with disabilities at a suburban high school with
a long-standing history of inclusion. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990
and its reauthorization of 1997 and 2004 created six essential principles. One of these principles
was the provision of the least restrictive environment and the mandate that students with
disabilities be educated in general education classes together with students without disabilities.
The purpose of this study was to investigate how the key stakeholders facilitated the inclusion of
students with disabilities in the general education setting. The participants were the principal,
three assistant principals, and the chair of the special education department, all referred to as key
stakeholders. Purposive sampling was used to collect data on the key stakeholders’ leadership
practices used to expand and support the inclusion of students with disabilities. Data from semi-
structured interviews, transformational leadership surveys, and observation were analyzed
through coding strategies and filtered by inductive analysis approach. The findings revealed that
the key stakeholders identified the institutional support and instructional leadership as two main
areas of focus necessary for promoting inclusion. The study intended to provide high school
administrators with tools on how to promote a receptive school culture and encourage the
inclusion of students with disabilities.
Keywords: inclusion, high school, special education, mainstreaming, inclusive culture

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1

This study intended to examine the practices of the key stakeholders at a suburban high
school in creating and maintaining the receptive school culture necessary for the effective
inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education setting. The introduction,
literature review, and the methodology of this study were co-authored while the data collection,
analysis, and findings were completed and reported separately. Researchers and practitioners
had studied the role of school administrators in establishing and maintaining an effective
educational culture for all students for many years. The literature reviewed guiding this research
demonstrated that, although school administrators played a critical role in promoting effective
school programs for the inclusion of students with disabilities, the role of the administrator was
considered within the context of the school. In particular, the role of the administrators was
investigated as a complex interaction between environmental, personnel, and in-school
relationships that influenced outcomes (Theoharis & Brooks, 2012). As school experience
continued to evolve, the role of school administrators and key stakeholders of high schools with
inclusive climates was examined and described within every school's culture.
Legal mandates and education research results contributed to changes following
developments in K-12 public education. Some of the changes required school administrators to
take on new and added responsibilities (Theoharis & Brooks, 2012). Historically, principals and
administrators, in general, served as disciplinarians and supervised teachers. Under the more
recent federal legislation, the administrators were responsible for managing personnel, funds, and
strategic planning. School administrators also accepted responsibilities associated with being

1
Chapter was co-written by Aida Babayan and Love Anuakpado, doctoral program students with
each contributing equally to this chapter but researched separately, one in a suburban and the
other in an urban high school.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 11
their schools' instructional leaders maintaining responsibility for teaching all students, including
students with disabilities (Lynch, 2012).
Another significant number of new developments in public education occurred in the area
of special education. Some legal institutional changes and development for special education
students focused on the instruction and inclusion of students with disabilities. The goal of
educational programs was to assist students maximize their learning. The environment for
students with disabilities to reach this outcome was under continued debate, and some theories
suggested that miscalculated learning environments very often diminished the possibility of
achievement (Jorgensen, McSheehan, & Sonnenmoser, 2010). As a result of an extended and
sometimes complicated history of treatment, educational professionals and service providers
sometimes minimized the capabilities of students with disabilities and their willingness to live a
normal life. These opponents of equitable treatment for individuals with disabilities argued that
excluding these students from educational processes was justified, appropriate, and right
(Obiakor, Harris, Mutua, Rotatori, & Algozzine, 2012).
Laws regarding special education were drafted primarily for the purpose of including and
preventing the marginalization of individuals with disabilities in the education system. The
beliefs of inclusion were rooted in the understanding that, in a free democratic society, all
members deserve to receive a fair chance and equal opportunity to develop and grow to their
potential (Theoharis & Causton-Theoharis, 2008, 2011; Vitello & Mithaug, 1998).
This study reviewed the literature on the history of inclusive education and how it
developed over time and adapted through the years. This review looked into where special
education is headed and how key stakeholders paved the path of this phenomenon in education.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 12
Background of the Problem
The current trend toward inclusion began with Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In
this landmark case, the court ordered the end of state-mandated racial segregation of public
schools. The Brown v. Board of Education case pronounced the end of separate-but-equal
education. Gordon and Monastiriotis (2006) suggested that, after the focus on school
desegregation had waned, students with disabilities became another disregarded group and the
focus for social change. Federal and state laws mandated free appropriate public education
(FAPE) for students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Although the
terms “inclusion” or “inclusive education” were written vaguely in the law, the definition of LRE
was contained in the law and provided the initial legal impetus for creating inclusive education
(Falvey, Givner, & Kimm, 1995). The law upholding the Individuals with Disabilities Act
(IDEA) in the area of LRE noted,
To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in
public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with nondisabled
children. Special classes, separate schooling or another removal of children with
disabilities from regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or
severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the
use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.
[2004, s300.114 (a)(2)] (IDEA, 2004)
The law also included a provision for when a student could not be educated with nondisabled
peers. The law stated,
Sec. 300.17 (b) to (d) provides that FAPE mean that special education and related
services are provided in conformity with IEP that meets the requirement in section 614(d)
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 13
of the Act. Consistent with section 614 (d)(1)(i)(v) of the Act, the IEP must include the
extent, of which the child will not participate in the regular classes with nondisabled
peers. (U.S. Department of Education, 2010).
The general understanding of the education of students with disabilities in the regular
education environment has been identified using many different labels, such as mainstreaming,
integration, and, recently, inclusion. Inclusion aims to educate students with disabilities in the
general education environment with their nondisabled peers, rather than in self-contained
segregated settings (Theoharis & Brooks, 2012). Although there has been much contention
regarding the effectiveness of inclusion, the number of schools and school districts practicing
and implementing inclusion programs continue to increase (Hehir & Katzman, 2012).
Fundamental differences exist regarding inclusion programs. These discrepancies center
on the conceptual and operational definition of an inclusion program. Inclusion models differ
across school districts in the United States, within a single state, and also within schools in a
single district. There are also differences in how inclusion programs work and what constitutes
effective inclusion in a single large-size high school. There is also dissimilarity on how the
inclusion of students with disabilities can be accomplished from one general education classroom
to another in a single high school. Additionally, the responsibility of complying with the IDEA
principles and providing FAPE in the LRE also exists. Today the burden of managing special
education policies and practices has shifted to the school administrators and the key stakeholders
of each school (Patterson, Marshall, & Bowling, 2000).
Studies conducted on how inclusion practices and programs work, what inclusion
practices mean for key stakeholders, and how the key stakeholders create an inclusive culture at
schools remains limited. This study primarily focused on better understanding the key
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 14
stakeholders’ role in creating and maintaining an inclusive school culture for students with
disabilities at a suburban high school. As John Dewey (1859-1952), the well-known American
philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer explained, education contributes to the
wealth of a nation and schools have an obligation to educate its students. Education is not
preparation for life; education is life itself (Danforth, 2008).
Statement of the Problem
Federal and state laws mandate FAPE for the education of students with disabilities in the
LRE (Riehl, 2000). Inclusion is implied in the FAPE mandate. Inclusion is not the mere placing
of students with disabilities in general education settings, classes, or environment (Ware, 2002).
Inclusion demands that school stakeholders have the preparation, capacity, and support to
educate all students within the general education environment. Inclusion includes the education
of students at individual school settings, sporting, and social events. The culture of schools must
remain sustainable for schools to continue to educate diverse students. The objective of this
study was to examine and describe the role of the key stakeholders that included the school
administrators and inclusion staff in creating and maintaining effective inclusive practices,
programs, and culture for students with disabilities in general education high schools.
Purpose of the Study
The goal of this study was to examine and describe the participants’ role in creating and
maintaining effective inclusive practices and a receptive school culture for the inclusion of
students with disabilities in a general education setting in a comprehensive public high school in
a suburban school district. While some studies identified school principals and site
administrators as the key stakeholders in creating effective school culture, research on how these
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 15
school administrators created effective inclusion programs at schools and what was known about
positive, inclusive school culture was limited.
This study sought to investigate how the key stakeholders addressed inclusion program
challenges in their high school. It intended to address the following question: What were
effective skills and strategies for the key stakeholders to create successful inclusion models in a
suburban high school? The focus of this study included an investigation of key stakeholders’
performance and the principal’s leadership practices. This study also sought to examine campus
culture and key stakeholders’ leadership style that promoted the successful inclusion of students
with disabilities in general education settings (Simon, 2011).
This study's investigation was necessary because of the legal mandates to explore
successful inclusion models to help students with disabilities excel in high school and become
successful in general education inclusive settings. The purpose of the study at the practice level
was to provide rich data about an underrepresented group of students in the high school
environment and to provide insight useful for educational stakeholders of inclusion programs and
the school district hiring, planning, and training of the key stakeholders. The purpose of the
study at the personal level was to understand more deeply the personal experience of the key
stakeholders in a program designed to support students with disabilities, to explore the impact of
transformational leadership practices and structures on high school culture, and to further
understand the function of individuals with disabilities laws, district’s special education policies,
practices, programs, and their outcome on high school culture.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 16
Research Questions
Two research questions guided this study:
• What were the perceptions of key stakeholders about the inclusion of students with
disabilities in high school?
• What did key stakeholders identify as practices that promote the inclusion of students
with disabilities and receptive school culture?
The key stakeholders were the administrators of a suburban comprehensive high school:
the principal, three assistant principals, and the special education department chair.
The Significance of the Study
In response to federal and state mandates for accountability and improved academic
achievement outcome for all students with disabilities, programs promoting inclusion in K-12
education increased (Zigmond, Kloo, & Volonino, 2009). Meeting mandated demands to
improve outcomes for all students with disabilities in general education settings required changes
in schools (Waldron, McLeskey, & Redd, 2011). Many studies identified the school principals
and administrator as the key figures in establishing and maintaining inclusive school cultures.
They needed to support school personnel to meet the needs of all students (Hoppey & McLeskey,
2013; Waldron et al., 2011; Pugach, Blanton, Correa, McLeskey, & Langley, 2009). Halvorsen
and Neary (2009) contended that the significant increase in inclusion programs led to the
suggestion that many students with mild disabilities preferred the educational model of full
inclusion with co-teaching. Despite the increase in inclusion programs, significant discrepancies
continued to exist between the number of students with disabilities who received instruction in a
special education self-contained setting when compared to those who received instruction in
general education settings (Hehir & Katzman, 2012).
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 17
While the placement of students in the general education setting was not the least
restrictive educational alternative for all students with disabilities, the number of students in
special education classes was significantly higher than students with disabilities in
mainstreaming or inclusive general education classes. This divide required further exploration.
The inclusion of students with disabilities in a general education classroom setting was believed
to improve educational outcomes for all students regardless of their abilities or disabilities (Harr-
Robins et al., 2012). A study on the primary leadership issues related to effective special
education indicated that, as expectations and rigor continued to rise, principal leadership in school
reform became increasingly necessary (National Association of Elementary School Principals,
2001a, 200lb; National Center of Intensive Intervention). According to Theoharis and Brooks
(2012), effective principals were both active site managers and influential instructional leaders. They
contended that the leadership skills of the administrators and principals were pivotal in meeting
the needs of students with disabilities.
This study was designed to reveal the role of the key stakeholders in the inclusion of students
with disabilities in a suburban high school. While much literature was found on kindergarten
through 12th -grade principals, there was much less literature on how principals and site
administrator created, implemented, and sustained effective inclusive school culture for students with
disabilities (Hehir & Katzman, 2012). This study was significant because it added to the limited
literature base linking transformational leadership to literature and research in the field of special
education. This linkage helped contribute to the ongoing search on what worked, especially as it
pertained to closing the achievement gap between students in special education and students in
general education programs.
Ware (2002) implied that inclusion was more than placing students with disabilities in
general education classrooms. This process was an approach similar to the deinstitutionalization
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 18
movement of the early 1970s in agreement to the intention of LRE mandates that required the
placement of students in the LRE where they received educational benefits. School-age students
with disabilities often had a negative school experience related to their having a disability (Goldstein,
2006). However, Praisner (2003) concluded that a majority of school principals had either negative
or ambivalent attitudes towards inclusion. The study of key stakeholders’ role in creating an
effective, inclusive high school was additionally necessary for developing a heightened
understanding of leadership capability that affected a school's culture and to champion the effective
inclusion of students with disabilities. If a connection existed between the characteristics of
transformational leadership and the dynamics of supportive school culture necessary to sustain an
effective inclusive high school, then these qualities were encouraged across schools within the
district (Mees, 2008).
Definition of Terms
Accommodations: Changes or adjustments in instructional materials or procedures that
allow students with disabilities to overcome challenges which surface from their disabilities and
access instruction and assessments (NICHCY, 2010, para. 3, National Center of Intensive
Intervention).
Administrators: According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the group of individuals
in leadership positions in charge of creating and enforcing rules and regulations. These people
may be principals, associate principals, assistant principals, deans, teacher specialists, or other
members in leadership positions at schools who administer planning, instruction, and daily
activities (Administrators, 1999).
Culture: The guiding beliefs, assumptions, and expectations evident in the ways a school
operates (Fullan & Hargreaves, 1996).
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 19
Free appropriate public education (FAPE): Section 504 (34 C.F.R. Part 104) of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 mandates that any programs and activities at public schools' districts
or state and local education agencies receiving funds from the United States Department of
Education (ED) restrict discriminating against anyone with a disability. According to the section
504, no individual with a disability…Shall, solely because of her or his disability, be excluded
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any
program, receiving Federal financial assistance (U.S. Department of Education, 2010, par. 1).
Idealized influence: Also known as charisma, describes the characteristics of the leaders
who act as role models for their followers. Charismatic leaders have usually high standards and
can be trusted to act morally and ethically. They usually provide followers with a vision and
sense of mission. The followers often follow and respect the charismatic leaders. Idealized
Influence is one of the transformational theory factors (Northouse, 2007, p. 175).
Individualized education program (IEP): According to the IDEA, students with
disabilities are entitled to receive FAPE, specifically designed individual education support and
other related services, such as speech and language, and physical therapy. These students have
the right to a written document called the individualized education program (IEP), developed by
an IEP team including the student, parents, teachers, administrators, and services providers
describing the designated individual education plan and related services (McLaughlin & Nolet,
2004).
Inclusion: Inclusion means when students with disabilities receive instruction and access
core curriculum in the general education setting together with their chronologically age-
appropriate peers in their school of residence (Halvorsen & Neary, 2009).
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 20
Individualized consideration: Individualized consideration is one of the transformational
theory factors. This refers to leaders who may show strong affiliation with some of their
followers while they are directive with others. These leaders are great coaches and mentors, they
delegate responsibilities to help their followers grow, and listen to their individual needs making
them feel represented (Northouse, 2007, p. 177).
Inspirational motivation: Or inspiration, meaning leaders communicate high
expectations, they motivate the followers to commit to the share vision of the organization by
using symbols and tapping into the followers’ emotions. These leaders improve the team spirit.
Inspirational Motivation is one of the transformational theory factors (Northouse, 2007, p. 175).
Intellectual stimulation: Intellectual stimulation is one of the transformational theory
factors. It refers to leaders who stimulate and encourage creativity and innovation in the
follower. These leaders celebrate followers who challenge and transform their own, leaders’ and
the organization’s beliefs. They endorse problem-solving and independent thinking in their
followers (Northouse, 2007, p. 177).
K-12: A term used in the United States referring to public schools from kindergarten
through 12th grade, before college.
Key stakeholders: The key stakeholders were the administrators of a suburban
comprehensive high school: the principal, three assistant principals, and the special education
department chair and teacher.
Least restrictive environment (LRE): The least restrictive environment relates to the
federal law mandate that all students with disabilities shall be educated together with their
nondisabled peers, with support from accommodations, modification, services, and supplemental
aids, to the maximum extent appropriate. The mandate stresses that students with disabilities
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 21
will be removed from regular classes only when education is not achieved satisfactorily with this
supporting framework. [20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Sec. 1412(a)(5)(A); 34 Code of Federal
Regulations (C.F.R.) Sec. 300.114.]
Mainstream referred to the placement of students with disabilities into general education
classrooms or activities with support from additional assistance, accommodations, and
modification. In mainstreaming, students go from special education classes to the general
education classrooms, but they are traditionally unable to achieve grade-level proficiency after
receiving significant support (Halvorsen & Neary, 2009).
Modeling: When principals set an example for the organizational members to follow,
consistent with the value the principal espouses (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000a).
Modifications: Adjustment to the curriculum, assignments, or assessments that
significantly alters the nature and level of learning of the information taught (McLaughlin &
Nolet, 2004).
Self-Contained: This term refers to classrooms for students with similar academic
requirements; however, it more often implies to students with severe disabilities who work
towards learning life-skills (McLaughlin & Nolet, 2004).
Universal design for learning (UDL): is the framework that intends to design flexible
environment and education accessible to all students, including students with disabilities in the
general education classroom (Hehir & Katzman, 2012).
Limitations and Delimitations
The following limitations focused on methodological issues that applied to this study
(Heppner & Heppner, 2004).
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 22
1. The findings were limited to the validity and reliability of the instruments. The data
collected was from only four participants in leadership role in one suburban high school.
The findings were limited to the participants’ judgement, understanding, and
meticulousness. The validity and reliability of the instruments were improved by
triangulation and cross examination of the collected data through cross examination of
the interview, survey, and observation records.
2. The findings were limited by the preciseness and discernment of the participants. It was
assumed that the principal/administrators provided honest feedback/responses and
interpreted the instrument as intended. This was important as the participants’
preciseness and judgement effected the collected data.
3. The findings were subject to the limitations of the interview, survey, and observation data
collection methods. The findings from the interviews, surveys, and observations were
collected, coded and reported. The limitations could significantly improve using
additional questionnaire or surveys.
4. The findings were based on Likert scale type questions which, to some extent, allowed
the participants to construct their responses or enabled the researcher to delve for further
discernment. Additional descriptive responses to a questionnaire may have provided
additional information but was not employed in this study.
The following delimitations applied to this study (Heppner & Heppner, 2004).
1. Only one high school in the Suburban Unified School District with students in grades 9 to
12 was the focus of this study. A wider sample number including several schools or
using schools located in different geographical areas may have resulted in enhanced
outcome.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 23
2. Only site administrators/principal at the identified school participated. This study did not
collect data from the other stakeholders such as the teachers and clerical staff’s.
3. This study was not intended to be generalized, although the results could be generalized
to site administrators, principals, and key stakeholders at suburban inclusive high schools
in California.
4. The case study and transformational leadership theory set the boundary on what
the findings of this study ascertained. This study focused on answering the research questions
within the boundaries of the transformational leadership theory at one suburban high school.
Organization of the Study
This study consisted of five chapters. The first chapter provided introduction and history
of inclusion in education. The second chapter reviewed the literature and research available in
this area, including past and future planned practices. Chapter Two examined the principles of
leadership and the theoretical frameworks. Chapter Three concentrated on the methodology of
the research, while Chapters Four and Five discussed the summary of the findings and
discussions, consecutively. Chapter five likewise included implications of the practices and
recommendations for future study.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 24
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2

A consideration of scholarly studies on high school stakeholders’ role in the inclusion of
students with disabilities revealed that principals struggled to create a successful inclusive school
culture. The elements that contributed to inclusion challenges were multifaceted (McLaughlin &
Nolet, 2004). This qualitative study collected sufficient data to recommend the high school key
stakeholders’ effective strategies in reforming their institution into successful models of
inclusion. Efficacious inclusion was the ability to educate students with disabilities in the LRE
while they showed academic growth. This chapter examines literature on the development and
history of education leading to inclusion. It looks into the literature on special education services
provided to students with disabilities in public schools and institutions in the United States of
America. It concludes with a historical overview of inclusion, its current implementation and
outcome, and the role of school leaders in the successful inclusion of students with disabilities.
What is Inclusion?
Suburban Unified School District (SUSD; a pseudonym) defined inclusion as an
inclusive environment in which all students, regardless of abilities, were educated in age-
appropriate general education settings where they were successful and received the necessary
support. In an exemplary inclusion setting, all students receive high-quality instruction and have
access to interventions, modifications, and appropriate levels of support so they can contribute,
participate, and be successful in the core curriculum in the LRE. All students in inclusive
environments learn from close personal interactions with each other. They develop awareness,
compassion, and preparation for real-life experiences. Schools with inclusion programs have a

2
Chapter was co-written by Aida Babayan and Love Anuakpado, doctoral program students with
each contributing equally to this chapter but researched separately one in a suburban and the
other in an urban high school.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 25
collaborative and respectful school culture where all students develop positive social
relationships and are full participating members of the community (Halvorsen & Neary, 2009).
History of Inclusion
Scholars have been increasingly interested in inclusion issues since Brown v. Board of
Education in 1954, but the root of these questions started in late 19th century. According to
Logan and Wimer (2013), education was based on morals, and if children perform poorly on
intelligence tests, it was concluded that either the student with disability was incapable of
learning or that the teacher performed poorly. In the early days of the 20th century, public and
private mental institutions grew and became home and school for individuals with disabilities
(Blatt, 1981; Downing, 2010). Families, advocates, teachers, and opponents of
institutionalization started questioning the inhumane and unacceptable practices, advocating for
the educational rights of individuals with disabilities (Downing, 2010).
Social change began with Brown v. Board of Education and then Parc v. Penn in 1972,
following with Mills v. Board of Education (1982), when separate-but-equal was examined and
resulted in policy changes (Downing, 2010). These legal cases set a precedent for Public Law
94-124. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 was drafted and ultimately
came to be known as IDEA (Downing, 2010). The inclusion movement started in the 1980s with
the lobbying of parents of students with disabilities. With No Child Left Behind (NCLB; 2001),
an educational reform law, many school districts moved towards mainstreaming and full
inclusion. It meant that students with disabilities received the opportunity to access the regular
education curriculum and receive education together with their nondisabled peers (Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. § 12101 et seq. West 1993). However, districts and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 26
schools interpreted the laws differently, and, as a result, special education inclusion became very
different from one school to another. It also varied considerably from state to state.
The IDEA and NCLB, the two largest federal programs, influenced the inclusion of
students with disabilities to a great extent. Under IDEA and NCLB, financial assistance is tied to
federally mandated programs that promote inclusion as part of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973. IDEA strengthened the mandate of LRE requiring the school districts to engage in
Child Find. It became every district's responsibility to search and find children with disabilities
and provide FAPE with the necessary services in the LRE (Hehir & Katzman, 2012). IDEA
encouraged students with disabilities to be educated with their non-disabled peers and gave
parents the power to due process with increased involvement rights in their child's educational
placement. An IDEA amendment in 1997 promoted access of students with disabilities to the
general education curriculum and academic content. It advised districts to improve their
programs by educating the students with disabilities together with their non-disabled peers and
close the achievement gap between them (Voltz & Collins, 2010). The United States Congress’
revision of the IDEA findings in 1997 states, “Special education no longer should be a place to
which students are sent, but instead should be a service for the students, one requiring
coordination of education and other sources” [20 U.S.C. § 1401(c)(5)(C)] and “Special
education related services and other (supplementary) aids and services should be provided to
students in the general education classroom, whenever appropriate” [20 U.S.C. §
1401(c)(5)(D)].
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
The All Handicapped Education Act gave birth to the IDEA in 1990 and then in 1997.
Later, it was further refined into the recent Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 27
Act of 2004 (Downing, 2010). IDEA consists of six core principles. It focused on the LRE,
nondiscriminatory identification and evaluation of students with disabilities, zero rejection
policy, the right to due process, and the sixth core principle that granted parents and students the
right to get involved and be the equal part of the decision-making process.
The IDEA mandates that students with disabilities be educated alongside their peers to
the maximum extent possible (Alquraini & Gut, 2012) as long as the education and setting were
in agreement with the student’s needs. The agreement is based on the IEP team and the goals
drafted in the IEP, according to the student's needs (Kilanowski-Press, Foote, & Rinaldo, 2010).
The IDEA (2004, Sec. 663 (c) [5] [E]) requires that students with disabilities receive evidence-
based instruction in core content. It directs the IEP teams to agree on a continuum of service
options with a recommended focus on inclusive practices. McLaughlin and Nolet (2004)
explained that IDEA mandated that every child be educated in the LRE, but did not use the word
inclusion anywhere in this Act. IDEA delineated that "inclusion" was not a mandate set forth by
IDEA, but undertook inclusion as a paradigmatic representation of LRE.
Least Restrictive Environment
To reiterate, IDEA (2004), conceived the term LRE, referring to the assumption that
students with disabilities will receive education together with their non-disabled peers in the
general education classroom (McLeskey & Waldron, 2011). It provided the foundational support
for legislation to include children with disabilities in the general education setting. Researchers
interpreted the LRE as the general education classroom setting where students with disabilities
attended and are highly regarded active participants who function with appropriate support to
gain academic progress and success (McLeskey, Rosenberg, & Westling, 2012). The mandate
itself, paired with the idea of inclusion, was widely supported by parents, researchers, and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 28
advocates of students with disabilities; however, the actual implementation of the LRE mandate
was a disputable topic that divided stakeholders and school professionals (McLeskey &
Waldron, 2007).
Successful Inclusion
IDEA required a continuum of placement options be available to meet the needs of
students with disabilities. The law also required that "to the maximum extent appropriate,
children with disabilities were educated with children who were not disabled. Special classes,
separate schooling, or “removal of children with disabilities from the natural environment
occurred when the nature or severity of the disability was such that education in regular classes
with the use of supplementary aids and services could not be attained satisfactorily” (IDEA Sec.
612 (5) (B).
Schools that successfully include students with disabilities are designed to welcome
diversity (Hoppey & McLeskey, 2013). They address the individual needs of all students,
regardless of their disabilities. In providing favorable inclusive school environment, skilled
school leadership is required to promote compelling attitudes and beliefs in the stakeholders,
encourage collaboration, and create a school environment that facilitates inclusion. As Hoppey
and McLeskey (2013) explained, a principal's critical role in creating an inclusive environment
was “lubricating the human machinery” where the principal supported the teachers to help
students accomplish to their potential (p. 253).
In a successful inclusive classroom, students are active learners who are encouraged to
make choices. Teachers use differentiated strategies when providing instruction to meet the
unique needs of the students. The teaching in an inclusive classroom is student-centered,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 29
allowing students to learn based on their goals and standards (Causton-Theoharis & Theoharis,
2008, 2009).
Theoretical Framework
Leadership: The Role of Administrators in Inclusion
Many experts view principals in the field of education as authority figures. They have
essential roles in the successful implementation of inclusive schooling both from the managerial
and philosophical point of view (Collins & White, 2001; Praisner, 2003; Schneider & Ingram,
1997). Other scholars asserted that school administrators set the tone for inclusion in their
schools (McLaughlin & Nolet, 2004). Administrators provide vision, leadership, and
administrative authority (Brotherson, Sheriff, Milburn, & Schertz, 2001). Studies also postulated
that the success of inclusion is usually closely tied to administrators' fundamental values, beliefs,
and positive attitudes as well as planning and willingness to implement the programs. Social
experience constituted in creating a favorable climate in which all students in the school could be
accepted (Collins & White, 2001).
Riehl (2000), categorized the administrators' tasks into three types of roles, according to
how they responded to diversity: (a) develop understanding of diversity, (b) promote inclusive
practices (inclusive teaching and learning practices and development of inclusive school
cultures), and (c) establish connections between schools and communities. The approach of
school principals to these three roles would determine the degree to which they promoted change
and diversity (Riehl, 2000). Principal leadership is crucial in developing inclusive schools and
student progress (Blase & Kirby, 1992; Hallinger & Heck, 1996, 1998; Leithwood & Jantzi,
2000a; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005). The more recent focus on inclusive school climate
and efforts on educational leaders to create favorable school climate demands that principals
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 30
acquire skills on how to work within a school milieu (McLaughlin & Nolet, 2004). Principals’
skills were considered critical to the promotion of receptive school culture favorable for
employment and student learning.
Leithwood, Jantzi, and Steinbach (1999) emphasized that a transformational leadership
model comports well with education. The most dynamic leaders augment transformational and
transactional leadership to bring about collaboration, commitment, performance, and high
achievement of followers and participants. Avolio (1999) agreed, stating that such leadership
increased the levels of trust, satisfaction, and commitment of individuals in the organization,
resulting in significant and positive changes in schools (Silins, 1994).
Theoharis and Brooks (2012) suggested that the most critical factor in school
effectiveness is the principal. They contended that principals provide instructional leadership
and are vital in creating organizationally appropriate work conditions in which teachers work
best (Blase & Kirby, 1992; Hallinger & Heck, 1996, 1998; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000a, 2000b;
Rosenholtz, Bassler, & Hoover-Dempsey, 1986). According to Theoharis and Brooks (2012), a
principal's transformational leadership increases teacher efficacy. Purkey and Smith (1983)
concluded that many variables are significant, but real change occurrs with the guidance and
leadership of the principal at the school level.
Transformational Leadership Theory
High school principals play a vital role in the culture of schools. A principal's leadership
is essential in creating effective schools and enhancing student achievement (Blase & Kirby,
1992; Hallinger & Heck, 1996, 1998; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000a; Marzano et al., 2005).
Leithwood et al. (1999) contended that a transformational leadership model comported well with
education. In a high school in Indiana, Philbin (1997) studied transformational leadership and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 31
student performance in 9th through 12th grades. The central point of the fact-finding was
whether there was a relationship between principals' transformational behaviors and enhanced
student performance determined by a state annual achievement test. Whether teachers reported
(a) willingness to extend themselves to work, (b) increased levels of job satisfaction, and (c)
perceived self-effectiveness and instructional practices. The analysis indicated that principals in
all of the high schools studied manifested transformational leadership behavior. Teachers’
perceptions of profoundly transformational principal resulted in teachers being happier with the
school leadership and willing to put greater effort in their jobs. Leithwood et al. (1999)
investigated the influence of leadership on vision in schools and learning organizations. The
result indicated that transformational principals created the school vision and learning processes
within the organizations by creating a learning culture.
Transformational leadership was considered part of the new paradigm (Bryman, 1992).
Bass and Riggio (2006) suggested that transformational leadership was a recent idea model
suited for future workgroups, striving for motivation, inspiration, and empowerment to become
successful in times of uncertainty. Transformational leadership is a process of changing people.
It transforms people's emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals (Northouse,
2007). Transformational leaders assess the followers' motives and treat them as full human
beings (Northouse, 2007). Transformational leaders influence followers to accomplish more
than what was expected of them. It is a process that often includes charismatic and visionary
leadership. High school principals can utilize transformational leadership skills to influence
teachers, school staff, students, and, on a micro to a macro level, the overall school community
and overall school culture.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 32
Transformational leadership can be used to influence an entire culture.
Transformational leaders play significant roles, and followers and leaders are inextricably bound
together in the process (Northouse, 2007). Downton (1973) coined the transformational
leadership idea for the first time. Its development as a critical approach to leadership began with
a classic work by political sociologist James MacGregor Burns (1978). Burns attempted to link
roles of leadership and fellowship. He considered leaders as people who tap into the motives of
followers to reach the goals of leaders and followers more confidently. Burns (1978) further
postulated that leadership is considerably different from power because leaders connect to
followers’ needs.
Transformational leadership is the process by which a leader connects with others by
engaging and raising their level of motivation and morality (Burns, 1978). Burns (1978) further
pointed out that Mohandas Gandhi was an example of a transformational leader. Gandhi had
changed himself while raising the hopes and demands of millions of his people in the process.
An instance in the organizational world was a manager who attempted to change his company's
corporate values to reflect a human standard of fairness and justice. In the process, both manager
and follower emerged with a stronger set of moral values. The conceptualization of
transformational leadership presented by Burns (1978) included raising the level of morality in
others.
Bass (1985) further expanded and refined another version of transformational leadership
that was consistent with Burns' (1978) prior works. Bass extended Burns’ work by giving more
attention to followers’ needs, rather than leaders’. He suggested that transformational leadership
could result in situations where the outcome was not positive (Bass, 1985, 1990; Bass & Avolio,
1993, 1994). Bass further contended that transformational leadership motivates followers to
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 33
accomplish more than expected. It motivates them by (a) elevating follower levels of
consciousness about importance and value of idealized goals, (b) getting followers to transcend
their self-interest to support their team or organization, and (c) moving followers to address
higher level needs.
Transformational leadership focuses on improving the performance of followers and
developing followers to their fullest potential (Avolio, 1999; Bass & Avolio, 1990). Individuals
who display transformational leadership have a strong set of internal values and ideals.
Transformational leaders are effective at motivating followers to act in a compartment that
facilitates the greater good rather than their self-interests (Kuhnert, 1994). Burns (1978)
introduced four models of transformational leaders: Factor 1, idealized influence or charisma;
Factor 2, inspirational motivation; Factor 3, intellectual stimulation; and Factor 4, individualized
consideration.
Factor 1: Charisma or idealized influence. These two terms described leaders who act
as robust role models to followers. Team members identify with their leaders and want very
much to emulate them. Leaders in this category have a very high standard of moral and ethical
conduct and are trusted to perform at an advanced capacity. Exemplary leaders provide a vision
and sense of mission to the followers and are deeply respected and trusted by the members.
Factor 2: Inspiration or inspirational motivation. Leaders in this category
communicate high expectations to followers and inspire followers through motivation to become
committed to the shared vision of the organization. These leaders use symbols and emotional
appeal to focus group members' efforts to achieve more than they would in their self-interest.
Inspiration or inspirational motivation leaders enhance team spirit.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 34
Factor 3: intellectual stimulation. The third factor includes leaders who stimulate
followers to be creative and innovative and to change their own beliefs and values, transforming
their leaders and organization. Intellectually stimulating leaders support the followers to try new
approaches and develop innovative ways of dealing with organizational issues, encourage
followers to think independently, and engage in particular problem solving.
Factor 4: individualized consideration. Factor 4 consists of leaders who provide a
supportive climate where individual needs of followers are listened to carefully. Leaders operate
as coaches and advisers while trying to assist followers in becoming fully actualized. Leaders
use delegation to help followers grow through personal challenges. The leader gives strong
affiliation for some members and employ specific directives with a high degree of structure to
others. Transformational leadership theory assumes leaders produce greater effects and move
followers to accomplish more than what is usually expected of them. They become motivated to
transcend their self-interest for the good of the group or organization (Bass & Avolio, 1990).
The research and work of Bennis and Nanus (1985) and Kouzes and Posner (1987, 2002)
analyzed and explained the nature and understanding of transformational leadership. Their
model of leadership was conducted based on an open-ended questionnaire administered to
middle and senior level leaders. Based on answers provided, they identified four common
strategies used by leaders in transforming organizations.
Bennis and Nanus (1985) concluded that, first, transforming leaders have a clear vision of
the future state of their organization, an image of an attractive, realistic, and believable future.
Second, transforming leaders are social architects for their organization. These leaders create a
shape or form for the shared meanings that people maintain within their organizations. Third,
these leaders create trust in their organizations by making their positions known and standing by
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 35
their positions. They are predictable and reliable even in times of uncertainty. Fourth,
transforming leaders use creative disposition of self through positive self-regard. Transforming
leaders knew their strength and weaknesses and emphasized their strengths rather than dwell on
their weakness. Transforming leaders have a consistent emphasis on education.
Kouzes and Posner (1987, 2002) developed a leadership model by interviewing 1,300
middle and senior level private and public sector leaders about leadership. The Kouzes and
Posner model consists of five fundamental practices that enable leaders to accomplish
extraordinary things. Each of the five practices of excellent leadership identified two
commitments that serve as strategies for practicing exemplary leadership. Kouzes and Posner's
five practices of exemplary leadership are discussed below.
Model the Way: Leaders need to be clear about their values and philosophy. Leaders
need to find their voice and express it, set examples for others, follow through on their
promises and affirm their commitments.
Inspire a Shared Vision: Effective leaders create a compelling vision that guides people,
visualize and communicate future outcomes, listen to the dreams of others and validate
them, inspire and challenged others to transcend and assist others.
Challenge the Process: Effective leaders have the willingness to innovate, grow, and
improve. They take risks to make things better.
Enable Others to Act: Outstanding leaders work effectively with people. They build
trust with others and promote collaboration; effective leaders listen to different points of
views with respect and create environments where people can feel good about their work
and contributed to the greater community.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 36
Encourage the Heart: Effective leaders nurture the heart by rewarding others for their
accomplishment, they are attentive to the needs of others to feel recognized and rewarded
for a job well done. They are authentic and support the greater collective identity and
community spirit.
How Transformational Leadership Approach Worked
Northouse (2007) postulated that a transformational approach to leadership is a broad-
based perspective that encompasses many facets and dimensions of the leadership process. He
explained how leaders initiate, develop, and carry out significant changes in organizations.

Figure 1. Transformational leadership theory (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978).
Strengths
Transformational leadership has original appeal. It is consistent with society's view of
what leadership means. Transformational leadership was widely researched in various aspects
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 37
and was the focal point of a large body of research since its introduction in the 1970s. People
were attracted to transformational leadership because it was appealing that a leader would
provide them with a sensible vision for the future (Bass & Avolio, 1990).
Transformational leaders recognize leadership as a process that occurred between followers
and leaders (Northouse, 2007). Leadership is not considered the exclusive responsibility of a
leader but, rather, becomes apparent from the reciprocity between leaders and followers.
Followers gain an essential position in the leadership process because the needs of others are
central to the transformational leader. The transformational approach provides an aggrandized
picture of leadership that includes both the exchange of rewards and leadership attention to the
needs and growth of the followers (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985). Transformational leadership
involves efforts by leaders to move people to high standards of moral responsibility (Burns,
1978). Transformational leadership is essentially morally uplifting (Avolio, 1999). There is
extensive evidence that transformational leadership was a valid form of leadership (Yukl, 1999).
Criticisms
A weakness mentioned by critics of transformational leadership theory is that it lacks
conceptual clarity since it involves a broader array of skills. It includes creating a vision,
motivating, being change agents, and building trust. Defining the parameters of transformational
leadership is difficult. Tracey and Hinkin (1998) pointed out the significant overlap between
Burn's four practices of idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration of transformational leadership. They argued that its limits did not
delineate. Additionally, the boundaries of transformational leadership often overlap with similar
conceptualizations of transformational leadership (Bryman, 1992). Some aspects of the four
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 38
practices are treated synonymously, although some models are components of transformational
leadership.
Another weakness of transformational leadership centers on how transformational
leadership is measured. In some studies, researchers used some version of the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) to measure transformational leadership while others
questioned the validity of MLQ. In some versions of MLQ, the four practices of
transformational leadership are highly associated with each other (for example, idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration).
They are comparable with one another, indicating that they are not distinct practices (Tejeda,
Scandura, & Pillai, 2001). Tejeda et al. (2001) further exhorted that some transformational
practices correspond with transactional and laissez-faire practices, which means that those
practices might not be exclusive to transformational model.
A third weakness of transformational leadership is that leadership is treated as a
personality trait or personal predisposition instead of as a behavior in which people could be
instructed (Bryman, 1992). If it is a trait, it becomes a problematic approach to train individuals
on how to change their traits. The problem is exacerbated because the word transformational
creates images of a single person being the most important component in the leadership process.
This theory posited that transformational visionary leaders have unique qualities that transform
others. These images accentuate a trait characterization of transformational leadership.
Additional criticism is that transformational leadership is elitist and anti-democratic (Avolio,
1999; Bass & Avolio, 1993). Since transformational leaders create changes, establish a vision,
and advocate new directions, they elicit the notion that they are acting independently of the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 39
followers or they place themselves above the followers' needs. Yukl (1999) contended that
transformational leadership suffered from a heroic leadership bias.
A final weakness is that transformational leadership has the potential to be abused. It is
unclear as to who determines if the leader's new vision is a better view. The dynamics of how
followers challenge leaders or respond to their vision is not entirely understood.
High School Principal Support Systems
A study conducted by the Stanford Educational Leadership Institute in conjunction with
The Finance Project, commissioned by The Wallace Foundation (2005) reported that principals
and a range of critics were concerned that leadership members rarely receive quality training and
efficient tools at university-based programs. These practitioners contested that, often,
preparation programs are disconnected from real-world complexities. They further contested
that the knowledge base of some preparation programs was weak and outdated. Also, curricula
often failed to provide grounding for effective teaching and learning. Besides, mentorships and
internships recurrently lacked depth or opportunities to test leadership skills in real situations
(Wallace, Paulson, Lord, & Bond, 2005).
Daresh (2004) suggested that school systems gained from the implementation of
mentoring programs for beginning school administrators. Mentors could provide support by
enabling beginning principals to feel a sense of comfort in moving in new directions. However,
having mentoring programs for new administrators did not guarantee that school districts and
individual schools were successful. Another affirmation by Daresh was that having an advocate
and supportive colleague enabled a new principal to take risks that might have otherwise been
ignored.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 40
A survey carried out by Horrocks, White, and Roberts (2008) on principals' attitudes
regarding the inclusion of students with autism, assumed that, despite the fundamental role of
principals in initiating and maintaining the support for change, only a few empirical studies were
reported on principals' views regarding inclusion. Overall, studies of the principals' attitudes
regarding inclusion revealed mixed findings. Some showed that principals supported the
benefits of inclusion while others revealed a tendency for low expectations for success (Avissar,
Reiter, & Leyser, 2003). Avissar et al. (2003) also corroborated that principals' vision and
leadership behavior promoted inclusive policies, although their support for inclusion depended
on the severity of the student's disability (Horrocks et al., 2008). The findings of this study
projected that the principals and key stakeholders needed additional training and support.
In a study exploring causes of principals' burnout, Federici and Skaalvik (2012) and
Whitaker (1996) concluded that some principals were frustrated and exhausted in their role. The
study further conveyed that the reasons for frustration and principals’ burnout were (a) the need
for more support systems built into their job, (b) principals’ perceived lack of central office
backing and understanding as well as networks required to provide them with systems of
support, and that (c) principals needed more time for reflection and more opportunities to interact
with other professionals and principals. Although principals occasionally met at principals'
meetings, time for talking, reflecting, and sharing problems and concerns was not present,
leaving many principals feeling isolated and alone in a world of conflict.
School principals should be informed to serve students with disabilities adequately.
Furthermore, if a new direction within educational leadership is the furtherance of social justice,
then the principals and key stakeholders should be prepared. Fair, equal, and equitable
educational opportunity for all students, with inclusion principles that account for the diversity of
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 41
all students attending school, require ensuring that leaders are prepared to apply those principles
(Pazey & Cole, 2013).
The implications of these studies are three-fold. First, principals and site administrators
desire more support systems to be better able to handle conflicts and increased pressures
associated with their job responsibilities. In-district support systems are needed whereby
principals have both formal and informal networks to brainstorm and resolve problems as well as
time to reflect and think. Mentor programs are necessary for both beginning and experienced
principals. University preparation programs are in a good position to establish centers for
principals as one mechanism of support. Second, educational administration training programs
need to better prepare future principals for the realities of the job. No longer is it sufficient to
provide managerial skills to prospective principals. Leadership skills should be thorough, so
future principals have a strong foundation and belief systems on which to base their difficult
decisions. Preparation programs, too, are recommended to include an emphasis on responsive
personal and personality characteristics that might match or conflict with the demands of the
principalship. Leadership development also needs to encompass the political realities of the job.
As collaborative decision making became a norm, dealing with many different constituencies
requires that principals have some background on how to work effectively with diverse groups
and how to handle potentially explosive situations. Third, school districts need to recognize the
challenging and demanding role of the principal completely. Principal's roles need to be
rewarding, fulfilling, and challenging. To remain in the job, principals need to feel that they are
continually growing as professionals and as individuals. Principals must feel that they are
admired and respected by others, achieve advancement and professional growth opportunities.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 42
They need to possess enough autonomy to make changes that would significantly impact the
learning environment in their buildings (Whitaker, 1996).
DiPaola, Tschannen-Moran, and Walther-Thomas (2004) examined the conditions and
concerns of principals in Virginia. Their study sought to find out the experiences and
perceptions that contribute to the growing shortage of principals. The findings suggested
principals did not feel that they had sufficient authority and resources to get the job done, and
principals were working long hours to fill the gap. More than half of the principals on the job
intended to retire in the next decade, which raised questions about who would step forward to
lead. These findings suggest that principals needed administrative support and more school site
autonomy to lead effectively.
Summary
Carey (2014) and Milner and Lomotey (2014) delineated the current context in which
urban education exists as an identity crisis. They highlighted the need to examine the structural
forms of inequity that are detrimental to student success rather than focus on the inaccurate
perceptions of others who classify particular students as deficient due to identity markers such as
poverty, race, ability or disability.
This review of literature began with a concise history of inclusion. The review
demonstrated how the inclusion of students with disabilities began and how inclusion continued
to evolve since its conception. Second, the review of literature examined what successful
inclusion entailed and what it may look like in districts and schools that are currently
implementing inclusion programs. Third, this review explored the transformational leadership
theory of Burns (1978) and Bass (1985). The basic premise of the exploration of
transformational leadership theory was to discuss its operational definition, explore its
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 43
components, strengths, criticisms, and inquired how transformational leadership affects the
establishment of inclusion school culture. Lastly, this review ascertained how transformational
leadership skills were required for high school principals and what support systems are available
to them to lead staff in schools.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 44
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3

This qualitative case study sought to explore the role of the high school principal and the
key stakeholders for the inclusion of students with disabilities in a comprehensive public high
school in the SUSD. It further sought to describe how the principal and key stakeholders
affected change to create and maintain a receptive high school culture hospitable to inclusion.
Hehir and Katzman (2012) recommended seven critical areas of focus necessary for achieving
the inclusive culture inclusive school vision, shared leadership, collaboration between key
stakeholders, support from the parents and community, innovative budget opportunities,
instructional reform, and school-wide UDL. Data collection for this study sought traces of these
components and other effective practices that might enrich the practitioners’ knowledge
regarding inclusion of students with disabilities in high schools.
The overarching goal of this study was to uncover and share practical tools and
guidelines that would aid high school key stakeholders and practitioners in providing FAPE in an
inclusive LRE for students with disabilities. Legally, since the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA,
schools ae mandated to provide public education to all students, instead of sending them to
special schools (Halvorsen & Neary, 2009). Although FAPE and LRE were two of the six
principles of the IDEA reauthorized in 2004, schools continued struggling in meeting the
challenges of providing inclusive education in the LRE to this segregated group of students
(Logan & Wimer, 2013). It was necessary to identify the essential tools to support the key
stakeholders at high schools and strengthen their skills in developing an inclusive culture that
would empower students with disabilities.

3
Chapter was co-written by Aida Babayan and Love Anuakpado, doctoral program students with
each contributing equally to this chapter but researched separately one in a suburban and the
other in an urban high school.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 45
Research Questions
Two research questions guided this study:
• What were the perceptions of key stakeholders about the inclusion of students with
disabilities in high school?
• What did key stakeholders identify as practices that promoted the inclusion of students
with disabilities and receptive school culture?
The key stakeholders were the administrators at a suburban comprehensive high school:
the principal, three assistant principals, and the special education department chair.
Research Design
This study used an in-depth interviewing process, a Likert scale survey, and field notes
from observation data of the high school principal, other school site administrators, and school
staff to explore ways for high school principals to establish and maintain an inclusive high
school culture. Bogdan and Biklen (1998) explained that, in qualitative research, researchers do
not put together a puzzle whose picture was already known. Researchers construct a picture that
takes shape as the researcher collects and examines parts.
Sample and Population
The subjects of this study were high school key stakeholders (principal, assistant
principals, and the special education department chair) who worked in a public 9th through 12th-
grade high school in the SUSD. These key stakeholders were responsible for all students,
including students with disabilities in the inclusion program enrolled in general education
classes. Following Creswell’s (2014) recommendation, the participants were specifically
selected to support the researcher in answering the research questions. Purposive sampling was
selected for this study to explore the inclusion phenomenon because the study sought to generate
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 46
data rich in detail and embedded in context. McEwan and McEwan (2003) asserted that
qualitative research was naturalistic in that researchers went where the action was descriptive
and were consistently focused on explaining and interpreting what was observed, heard, and
read. The structured interview approach was for the following reasons: to obtain a first-hand
account of the stakeholders’ perspective and opinions, due to time limitations, and to help ensure
the comparability of data across individuals and settings. Pre-structuring methods reduced the
amount of data collected. Negotiating relationships, this study required the researchers to have a
unique relationship with study participants. There were working relationship with participants as
both collaborators and as graduate students trying to understand the components necessary for an
inclusive high school culture. It was essential for this study that the participants be open about
their views, opinions, and suggestions and that they trusted that the data collected was used in an
unbiased and not harmful manner.
Purposeful selection was used to achieve representation, or typicality, of settings,
individuals, and activities. The subject of this study was one suburban high school that had
students with special needs and disabilities in the inclusion programs who were concurrently
enrolled in their various general education classes. The participating school was purposefully
identified due to more than 20 years of engagement in inclusion of students with disabilities in
general education setting. Purposive sampling, according to McEwan and McEwan (2003), was
used deliberately to provide information that was especially relevant to the research questions
and goals in this study that could not be derived as well from other choices. Weiss (1994)
argued that qualitative interviews should use a panel instead of a sample. Patton (1990) stated
that selecting times, settings, and individuals that could provide the researcher with the
information needed to answer the researcher's questions was the most critical consideration in
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 47
qualitative selection decisions. For this study, the interview participants decided on the time and
location preferred for conducting the interview. Each interview had 20 to 30 minutes dedicated
as the time limit. Multiple data collection methods (triangulation) were used for this study.
These included interviews with the key stakeholders, observation records, and surveys from the
participants. Written consent was obtained for audio recordings from all interview participants.
The purpose of using multiple methods was to gain information about inclusive school
climate and practices at this specific high school. Greene (2007) argued that multiple methods
be complementary and expand and broaden the range of aspects rather than strengthen particular
conclusions about what was studied. Categorizing analysis was used to identify the units of a
segment of data that seemed relevant and meaningful. Open coding captured what seemed
essential or was new insights (Corbin and Straus, 2007). This study connected strategies and
narrative analysis to reset and re-sort data into the holistic view of how the relationship of the
interview data and observational notes were sorted into categories.
Participant Profiles
The participants were the principal of Diamond High School, the three assistant
principals, and the special education department chair. The department chair was intentionally
recruited due to her extended years of experience in a leadership role and in planning inclusion
programs for students with disabilities at this school. The participants were four Caucasian
females and one male, with an average of 18 years of experience in education. The principal and
assistant principals had started their careers in teaching but moved to administrative positions
with on average 9 years of experience in leadership positions. The principal and two female
assistant principals held doctoral degrees in education. The participants had, on average, 14
years of experience with implementing inclusion programs as teachers and administrators at the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 48
time of the study. The department chair had 18 years of experience in supporting inclusion at
Diamond High School, the principal had 15 years and the three assistant principals had, on
average 10 years of experience in implementing inclusion. Some of the assistant principals’
experience in inclusion was from other high schools in the same geographic area. In general, the
stakeholders’ multitude years of experience in inclusion contributed vastly to this study. Tables
1 and 2 in Chapter Four depict the participants’ demographics, job titles, and their experiences in
inclusion and education in general.
The History of the Inclusion Program
The special education department chair explained in detail the history of inclusion at
Diamond High School during the interview. She elucidated that the inclusion program started
very small and evolved over time. The first inclusion classes were born in 1997, the year she
started working at this school. They had only two earth science classes where a fully
credentialed general education science teacher worked with a fully credentialed special education
teacher in a co-teaching model. Co-teaching is defined as “when two or more professional
educators co-plan, co-instruct, and co-assess in one classroom” (Murawski, 2003, p. 10). Each
10th-grade class had about 40 to 45 students of whom, on average 8 to 10 students were
identified as having one or more mild or moderate disabilities. Originally, the interviewee was
the special education teacher working collaboratively with two general education teachers,
engaged in co-teaching. Other academic core subjects such as English, math, and social studies
were offered separately in either general education or special education classes. In 2003, the
school invited Wendy W. Murawski to provide training in co-teaching for about 20 special
education and general education teachers. At that time, the number of academic classes grew to
include multiple social studies and English classes in 9th through 12the grades co-taught by the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 49
20 trained teachers. After 1997, inclusion also gradually developed to include students with
disabilities increasingly in elective courses such as arts, photography and drama and extra
curriculum activities like club life, physical education, athletics, and band. The elective classes
were taught only by a general education credentialed teacher. In some cases, depending on the
students’ needs, a paraprofessional, also called as educational assistant, was assigned to the
elective inclusion classes.
There was a special education teacher assigned as consultant to the inclusion classes
taught by only the general education teacher. The assigned special education teachers
communicated and consulted with the general education teachers on a weekly or monthly basis,
depending on the need, and provided the necessary support for the students with disabilities who
attended the general education classes that were not following the co-teaching model. The
combination of co-teaching and consultation inclusion continued growing to include all high
school core subjects of English, algebra, science, social studies, and elective courses until, in
2011, the collaborative consultation model was adopted. The collaborative school consultation
model, used in states such as Idaho, Massachusetts, and Vermont, brought special education
services to the students with special needs in the general education classroom where the teachers
and service providers and professionals collaborate in supporting the students access the
curriculum (Idol, 2006). Gradually, as the number of inclusion classes increased, the number of
separated special education classes decreased. The department chair explained that between
2011 and 2013, the AYP scores for the special education sub-group was 48 points and graduation
rate reached its highest score of 98% for students with disabilities, from an average of 60%.
Since 2011, the school maintained only one class for 10 to 13 students with severe disabilities to
learn life-skills, about half of the day, while they remained in inclusion for the second half.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 50
Additionally, one period of English and math classes for students whose IEPs required separate
setting was upheld together with a handful of study classes referred to as “resource lab” where
students went to receive additional instructional support, take tests, or complete assignments.
Overview of Suburban Unified School District
Suburban Unified School District (SUSD) was a very diverse TK-12 district providing
instructional services to 25,984 students in 31 schools. These schools included one kindergarten
through 12th grade independent studies school, one school for students with special needs, 20
elementary schools, four middle schools, one continuation high school, and four comprehensive
9th through 12th grade high schools. According to the SUSD, there were approximately 8,037
high school students, 5,852 middle school students, and 12,095 elementary school students at the
time of this study. SUSD had a population with a variety of socioeconomic and demographic
backgrounds. The student population was 56.4% Caucasian (includes Armenian, European and
Middle Eastern), 22.6% Hispanic, 12.6% Asian, 6.4% Filipino, 1.5% African American and
0.5% Native American, Pacific Islander and students who declined to state. In SUSD, there were
65 languages spoken with the top four being English, Armenian, Spanish, and Korean.
Approximately 45% of all students in SUSD qualified for free or reduced-price lunch.
Diamond High School
Diamond High School (a pseudonym) was one of the four comprehensive high schools in
the SUSD. Student enrollment at Diamond High School at the time of the data collection was
1849, evenly distributed by gender. According to its 2012 Western Association of Schools and
Colleges (WASC) self-review, Diamond High School was an award-winning school. Diamond
High School was designated a California distinguished school in 1995 and 2005 and a National
Blue Ribbon Award recipient in 2000. Also, Diamond High School received the Urban Music
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 51
Center's BRAVO award, was named one of the top 12 public high schools by U.S. News (2008)
and ranked within the top 20% of American high schools by both Newsweek and US News &
World Report. The ethnic composition of the current students' population was 59% White, 24%
Hispanic or Latino, 15% Asian, and 2% African American and two or more races. Also, 47% of
students were classified as English language learners, 70% as socioeconomically disadvantaged,
and 8.2% as students with disabilities (U.S. News & World Report 2012).
The staff at Diamond High School consisted of 70 teachers, four administrators, four
counselors, one full-time psychologist, a library media teacher, speech, language and hearing
specialist, teacher specialist, and nine full-time clerical support staff. At Diamond High School,
all teachers were fully credentialed, and only two taught outside of the subject area of
competence. According to its 2012 WASC self-review, Diamond High School staff were highly
educated; four staff members held doctoral degrees, 60 held master's degrees and 63 held cross-
cultural, language and academic development credentials (WASC self-report staff, 2012).
Diamond High School started including students with disabilities in general education
classes under inclusion co-teaching model with a couple of classes in 1999 and gradually
increased them to 12 classes in 2010. In 2011, the consulting inclusion model was adopted with
raising the number of inclusion classes to 42, including the majority of students with disabilities
in the general education classes. The 2011 incoming freshman class was part of a large
consulting inclusion model, and most of the students with learning disabilities were placed in the
consulting inclusion model general education classes for all academic and elective subjects. At
the time of this study, the majority of students with learning difficulties were placed in general
education inclusion classes to ensure their right to a FAPE in the LRE. It was expected that this
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 52
exposure to rigorous standards-based curriculum and assessment with accommodations would
help this population raise its performance.
Conceptual Framework
This study was informed by the transformational leadership body of theory as well as
extensive research reviews on inclusive school practices and receptive school culture.
Hauserman and Stick (2013) contended that transformational leadership provided one avenue to
understand the influence of principal's actions on teachers' attitudes. The variables given by
transformational leadership theory lend themselves to studying school settings in connection
with a measurable report of transformational leadership qualities. The present focus on school
change and efforts to create successful educational leaders required that principal and site
administrators mastered a deeper understanding of how to work within a school milieu
(Whitaker, 2003).
The number of students identified with a disability has increased by 151% since 1989
(Ysseldyke, 2001). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2016), the
number of students with disabilities in the 2013-14 school year was almost double the number of
students in 1976-77 school year. Unfortunately, students with disabilities received an
inconsistent and disconnected school day because they left their general education classroom
often to receive specialized instruction and related services (Capper, Frattura, & Keyes, 2000).
Moreover, these specialized programs failed to result in high student achievement, as measured
by post-school outcomes or standardized scores. For example, in the United States, despite
extensive efforts at providing special education for more than 25 years since the implementation
of federal disability law, 22% of students identified with one or more disabilities had failed to
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 53
complete high school, compared to 9% of students without a disability label (National Council
on Disability, 2000).
The inclusion of students with disabilities was dilatory, but a coercive phenomenon.
Bowers (2009) proposed that this trend be a significant change for most school communities.
Studies had shown that the successful implementation of innovation and change in schools was
related to leadership behavior of the principals. It was logical, then, to assume that the
leadership behavior of the principal and key stakeholders might influence the way in which
inclusion was accepted and implemented in schools (Bowers, 2009).
The conceptual framework, transformational leadership theory, might provide insights on
how a school principal could conclusively establish, implement, and sustain a receptive school
culture where students in the inclusive programs thrived. The conceptual framework considered
how transformational leaders led as an effort to satisfy followers' needs and guide the followers
to a higher level of work performance and organizational involvement that displayed respect and
encouraged participation (Bass, 1985). With increased emphasis on school change and efforts to
create successful educational leaders, increasing demand was put on the professionals to gain a
deeper understanding of leadership skills when working within a school environment (Whitaker,
2003).
Validity
Creswell (2014) described that validity was one of the strengths of qualitative research.
A high validity required that the researcher, the participants, or the readers of an account agree
on the accuracy of the findings. This study incorporated multiple approaches to assess the
accuracy of the findings and convince readers of the study's findings. Different sources of data
were examined. Evidence from the convergence of interview, observation, and survey data and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 54
perspectives from the participants was used to build a logical interconnection and justification
for the themes of this study.
Credibility
Self-reflection was used to comment on how the researcher’s background shaped the
interpretation of the findings. Data were compared continuously with codes and written memos
about the codes and their definitions. Transcripts were checked to ensure that they did not
contain obvious mistakes made during transcription. A peer debriefing was used to enhance the
accuracy of the accounts. The researcher spent prolonged time in the field and developed an in-
depth understanding of the inclusion phenomenon. Information that ran counter to the themes
were objectively presented.
Trustworthiness
Maxwell (2013) affirmed that research is always, to some degree, an intrusion into the
lives of the participants in a study. The researcher provided a clear and careful explanation of
the purpose of the study, participants’ expectations, and what would be done with the data. A
primary obligation was to determine how the participants perceived the researchers’ actions.
Response to participants’ perceptions and understanding was negotiated to develop useful and
ethically appropriate relationships with participants.
Data Collection
The data in a qualitative study can include virtually any observed, heard or
communicated to the observer while conducting the study (Maxwell, 2013, p. 87). What is
happening in the research scene was the data, whatever the source, whether interview,
observations, or documents, in whatever combination. Maxwell (2013) stated that qualitative
data includes what and how something was told and the conditions of where it was told. It also
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 55
includes all of the data surrounding what was being described in the research (Glaser, 2001, p.
145). Aligned with Maxwell (2013) and Glaser’s (2001) recommendations, this study utilized
triangulation, which involved using different methods with different strengths and limitations to
support a single conclusion. Interviews were the primary source of data from the school
principal and site administrators. Data were collected from August 2017 through January 2018.
The interviews included each a minimum of 20 minutes of audio recorded meetings with each of
the informants. The 21 open-ended interview questions were developed and presented to a group
of professionals in the field of education for critique and refinement prior to presenting them to
the participants at the interviews. For the survey questions, the Survey of Transformational
Leadership instrument was utilized. This was a four-point Likert scale validated survey with
answers ranging from 1 (rarely) to 4 (almost always) for the participants to record their
responses. Observations consisted of monthly one-hour observations of principal and the site
administrator meetings and bi-weekly one-hour observations of different staff meetings.
In the data collection phase, a field log was used to document a detailed account of ways
time was spent on site in addition to meticulous observation records. Field logs were also used
during the transcription and analysis phase. The field logs were digital and contained
comprehensive records of the observations sorted in folders. Additionally, a digital field diary
was utilized to chronicle thoughts, feelings, experiences, and perceptions throughout the research
process. This information was used during analyzing and coding of the collected data.
Data from stakeholders was collected through formal and informal interviews,
anonymous questionnaires and observation records. The use of multiple measures of evidence
collection was intended to do the following: (1) To gain information about a different aspect of
the phenomena. This purpose included complementarity and expansion; used to broaden the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 56
range of aspects or phenomena that addressed rather than merely strengthen particular
conclusions about one phenomenon. (2) The interview gave an efficient and valid way of
understanding the participants’ perspective confirming Maxwell’s (2013) reporting. (3)
Observation enabled assessor to draw inference about participants’ perspectives that participants
were reluctant to state in an interview directly, or that could not be obtained by relying
exclusively on interview data. Weiss (1994) recommended for an interview to be useful,
researchers needed to ask about specific events and actions, rather than pose questions that
elicited only generalized or abstract opinions. Following the expert advice, the interview
questions were developed and refined by a group of professionals in the field of education, to
help enrich the questions and facilitate extraction of rich information from the collected data.

Figure 2. Data collection and triangulation.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 57
Table 1
Theoretical Research Alignment Matrix
Research Question Theoretical Framework Data instrument Questions
What were the perceptions of
key stakeholders about the
inclusion of students with
disabilities in high school?
Transformational Leadership
Theory

(Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978)
RQ1: Questions
5,6,7,8,10,13,14

Observation data
What did key stakeholders
identify as practices that
promote the inclusion of
students with disabilities and
receptive school culture?

Transformational Leadership
Theory

(Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978)
RQ2: Questions 11, 12, 15,
16, 17, 18, 19

Survey Q 1-18

Observation data
Demographic Questions Survey:
Q1,2,3,4,9,20,21

Data Analysis
Data collection and data analysis must be a simultaneous process in a qualitative study
(Merriam, 2009; Marshall, & Rossman, 2006). Qualitative data analysis primarily entails
classifying things, persons, and events and the properties which characterized them (Merriam,
2009). Data analysis began immediately after completing the first interview or observation.
Data analysis continued throughout the research process, with the researcher stopping to write
reports briefly. Maxwell (2013) contested that researcher should never collect data without
substantial analysis going on simultaneously. It was likewise reaffirmed that graphing data on
the same day that the researcher collected the data supported the researcher's progress (Maxwell,
2013).
The researcher surveyed the principal, assistant principals and the special education
department chair. Interviews were the second point. Finally, observations served as the final
point of triangulation. The initial step in this qualitative analysis was reading the interview
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 58
transcripts and observational notes and listening to interview tapes before transcription. The
researcher wrote notes and memos on what was observed and heard in the data. The researcher
developed tentative ideas about categories and relationships. The logical options for this study
were memos, categorizing strategies (coding and thematic analysis), and connecting strategies.
Memos were used to capture the researchers' analytical thinking about the data collected and to
facilitate and stimulate analytical insights (Maxwell, 2013). Categorizing and coding analysis
identified units and segments of data that seemed relevant and meaningful. Coding helped to
compare time and space, the influence of one thing on another, and to see actual connections
between things (Maxwell, 2013). This study’s analytical option was necessary for connecting
strategies. It established a distinction between organizational substantive and theoretical
categories, which explicitly identify the content of the participant's statement or action.
After the data for this study were collected and coded, the researcher analyzed the data
for a pattern and recurring themes in leadership style, active inclusion of students, and supportive
school culture. Triangulating the data gathered through an interview, observation, and
questionnaire served to demonstrate the connection between the conceptual framework and a
supportive and efficient school culture for students with disabilities. Triangulation was intended
to address any potentially severe validity threats to the research conclusion.
Ethical Consideration
Attention to ethical issues in qualitative research is recognized increasingly as
indispensable for ethical reasons and as a fundamental aspect of research (Cannella & Lincoln,
2011). Maxwell (2013) deduced that ethical concerns should be involved in every aspect of
research design, including in methods, research questions, validity issues, critical assessment of
conceptual framework, and was also relevant to research goals.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 59
This study followed several ethical protocols. The study and the data collection started
after the Review Board process was thoroughly followed and consent was received. The data
was kept confidential to the maximum extent possible. The participants were contacted through
email but the collected data was kept separate from the emails in order to protect participants’
identity confidential without using any identifying information. All collected data was kept in
locked physical and electronic locations to assure confidentiality. Participants were made aware
of the intent of this study and participated voluntarily after reviewing and consenting to the
process in writing. They consented to the audio recording and reviewed the data collected before
the data was accumulated for this report. The data collected from this study will be shared with
the participants to support future inclusion of students with disabilities at this school.
Summary
Despite the limitations and delimitations, this study employed Maxwell’s (2013)
triangulation, feedback, precious data, and quasi-statistics. This study counterbalanced flaws
that were inherent in a single method. Throughout the study, the researcher solicited feedback
from the dissertation committee when forming theories or generalization from research data.
Triangulation helped identify and prevent biased or skewed logic that could threaten the
conclusions.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 60
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this qualitative case study was to examine the stakeholders’ role and
practices in creating and maintaining an inclusive school environment for all students, including
students with disabilities, in a suburban comprehensive public high school. The participants
recognized as stakeholders were the administrators: the principal, three assistant principals and
the special education department chair. The goal was to ascertain the stakeholders’ attitudes,
performance, and management skills in the area of creating an inclusive school milieu for
students with disabilities and study if the stakeholders’ performance and practices associated
with the components of the transformational leadership theoretical framework and characteristics
of transformational leaders. Data were collected to generate rich information and answer the
research questions. Gathered evidence identified a strong association between the
transformational leadership framework and school leaders who promoted an inclusive school
culture. Additionally, the study identified tools and practices that administrators may employ to
facilitate the inclusion of students with disabilities in high schools.
Results
This chapter presented the results from semi-structured interviews, surveys, and
observations. The researcher inquired regarding the key stakeholders’ perceptions towards
inclusion and how their perceptions influenced the way they addressed the challenges of creating
an inclusive environment. The study collected data on key stakeholders’ leadership practices,
skills, personal experiences, and performance in creating and maintaining a receptive inclusive
culture and explored the association of the findings with the transformational leadership
theoretical framework. The key stakeholders participated in a semi-structured interview
answering 21 questions and completed the Transformational Leadership Survey. The
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 61
observations, surveys, and interviews took place during the same time period within the five
months of August 2017 to January 2018.
The participating school and the stakeholders were purposefully identified due to more
than 20 years of engagement in inclusion of students with disabilities in general education
setting. The participants were the principal, the three assistant principals, and the special
education department chair. The participants had, on average, 14 years of experience with
implementing inclusion programs. In general, the stakeholders’ multitude years of experience in
inclusion contributed vastly to this research study. The tables 1 and 2 depict the participants’
demographics, job titles, and their experiences in inclusion and education in general.
Table 2
Par t i c i pan t s ’ Demographics
Participant’s Title Gender Age Race
Principal Female 45 Caucasian
Assistant Principal 1 Male 38 Caucasian
Assistant Principal 2 Female 35 Caucasian
Assistant Principal 3 Female 34 Caucasian
Special Education
Dept. Chair Female 45 Caucasian

Table 3
P ar t i c i pan t s ’ Titles and Experience
Participant’s Title Number of
Participants
Average Years
Experience in Education
Average Years
Experience in Inclusion
Principal 1 20 (13 as administrator) 15
Assistant Principals 3 13 (5 as administrator) 10
Special Education
Dept. Chair 1 21 18

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 62
Guided by Maxwell’s (2013) recommendations, descriptive coding analysis and inductive
analysis approach were used to assign key words or phrases that were frequently repeated in the
data or summarized ideas extracted from the data. A variety of coding concepts, such as
descriptive, process, pattern, and simultaneous coding were used in this process. Additionally,
the codes were compiled and reduced through inductive analysis approach. A variety of themes
and sub-themes were obtained from the ongoing comparative analysis of the codes. Results
contributed to recognizing the practices that mimicked the four factors of the transformational
leadership theoretical framework and helped promote an inclusive environment and a receptive
school culture in this high school. The findings were guided by the following two research
questions:
• What were the perceptions of key stakeholders about the inclusion of students with
disabilities in high school?
• What did key stakeholders identify as practices that promoted the inclusion of students
with disabilities and receptive school culture?
Observations
This study used an in-depth observation of the high school principal, school site
administrators, and school staff exploring essential information on the stakeholders’ practices
that supported and maintained an inclusive high school culture. Observations were conducted
from monthly administrative team meetings and an hour bi-weekly observations of different staff
meetings over a five-month period between August 2017 and January 2018. The observations
were collected in digital format and sorted in folders according to date and the titles of the
observed meetings. The observation data provided participants’ perspectives that were
overlooked or went unnoticed during interviews or surveys. Data collection and analysis began
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 63
immediately after the collection of every observation and continued throughout the research
process. Brief reports were written after every data collection and analysis. The researcher used
categorizing analysis to identify the relevant and meaningful data, followed by open coding of
newly collected data that seemed new insight and essential. The data was collected through
narrative analysis to sort into a holistic view combined with the observational notes that were
surfaced and sorted into categories.
During the observations, strong collaboration was revealed among all including custodial
staff, office staff, support staff, counselors, educators, administrators, students, and even
volunteer parents present at the site during the observations. Teachers encouraged students to
work in collaborative groups to learn and help each other through critical thinking to solve
problems. Another unique collaboration was the sharing of lesson plans between the teachers
through a lesson plan digital folder accessed by educators working on this school site. Detail
examples of observation records are provided throughout this chapter.
Survey
Another source of data collection for this study was a Survey of Transformational
Leadership instrument. This instrument was a four-point validated Likert scale survey with
answers from 1 (rarely) to 4 (almost always). Participants each read the questions and answered
their preferences by circling the numbers 1 through 4. Participants were not asked to record their
names on the surveys and remained anonymous by putting their responses in an office mailbox.
The result of the survey and interpretation is noted below, in chapter four under sub-heading
Philosophy and Commitment.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 64

Research Question 1
The first research question is about the perceptions of key stakeholders about the
inclusion of students with disabilities in high school. According to Muhammad (2009),
perceptions are participants’ unique experiences that they bring with them to a new environment.
The perceptions of administrators play a powerful role in how they form the school culture and
serve their students. The school culture is formed by the norms and values that the
administrators set, and they are highly influenced by the rituals and ceremonies that make up the
positive or toxic culture of an organization (Muhammad, 2009). In the coming sections, you'll
discover that the stakeholders perceived the inclusion of students with disabilities in this high
school as a strand of their school culture that was made possible by their staff and visionary
administrators who considered the collaborative inclusive school culture as part of their
norm. The high school administrators had developed a receptive school culture that applauded
inclusiveness and celebrated diversity, which embraced inclusion of students with
disabilities. The stakeholders had different views about inclusion depending on their positions
and roles at the school, but the common themes identified when analyzing the collected data
were (a) collaborative school culture and (b) philosophy and commitment.
Collaborative School Culture
One of the common themes that regularly appeared when analyzing the data was the
presence of a collaborative school culture at Diamond High School. One of the stakeholders
stated,
We don’t make any decision individually in this school without consulting with others.
When any type of decision making is necessary, first, we make teams and committees
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 65
with pertinent members. Then the team members complete and compile their research,
present it to the other members, everyone voice their opinions and concerns deciding or
voting on how they want to proceed. Consensus is reached collaboratively.
The stakeholders shared that their school was based on a philosophy of collaboration in
all areas of daily school management, procedures, and making decisions on instructional
resources. Ongoing communication took place through daily emails between administrators and
all staff in addition to weekly staff meetings that were embedded into the school schedule for the
members to communicate. As a result, according to the need, the staff met all together, in teams,
committees, or small groups. Looking back at the framework, all four factors of the
transformational theory were present in the behavior of the participants. First, the stakeholders
who were the administrators practiced idealized influence by modeling the collaboration and
inclusion of all members. They trusted the followers to make the appropriate ethical decisions.
This set the tone for the followers to imitate their leaders’ behaviors and collaborate similarly
with their peers and students. The collaboration encouraged the teamwork spirit, representing
the inspirational motivation factor of the framework, and intellectual stimulation was present
when the staff worked collaboratively finding creative solutions to the problems. Lastly,
bringing the staff together for solving problems through collaboration and teamwork was
individual consideration, the fourth factor of transformational leadership. The stakeholders
delegated and coached the followers, stimulated the members’ self-growth, and provoked the
feeling that the followers were represented and heard.
All interviewees added that the staff came together and wrote or reviewed their vision
and mission statements together every year. The interviewee with the most years of experience
at Diamond High School stated that collaborative writing of the vision and mission statement
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 66
began the second year she started working at this school. She added that the prior principal at
the school had a vision to promote inclusion and brought about a positive inclusive school
culture. The current principal who replaced the previous visionary principal followed in his
footsteps. The special education department chair stated,
Changes happened over time. This culture of collaboration and acceptance of diversity
was achieved through almost 20 years of promoting diversity, many staff developments,
and implanting positive beliefs in the school staff. We were lucky to have two very
knowledgeable and visionary principals. During the last 20 years, we had only two
principals with similar beliefs. This consistency and common philosophy was important
for shaping our school culture. They understood that all students can learn and the
inclusion of students with disabilities in necessary. They used their skills to transform
our school to an environment with increased inclusion where our students with
disabilities thrive.
As transformational leaders, the charismatic stakeholders of this study set high
expectations for the followers to practice moral and ethical conduct by trusting them with
drafting the school’s vision and mission statement collaboratively every school year. The staff
looked into the baseline data from the previous school year and wrote a vision and mission
statement at the beginning of the year which inspired the followers to be motivated and
committed to the vision of the organization. This set the tone for the staff to use similar
inclusive practices throughout the year with their students and peers.
One of the assistant principals noted that she gained experience about inclusion at her
previous school. However, her knowledge multiplied when she joined Diamond High School as
an assistant principal. She recognized the principal of this school as the main force behind the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 67
notion of promoting a receptive collaborative and inclusive school culture. The assistant
principal added in her interview that the principal was the main role model for others in the
leadership positions and all staff in promoting collaborative inclusive school culture. She
explained that, following their principal’s path, she learned that, as a leader, she must allow her
staff to agree on implementing new practices. This notion was reinforced during the interview
with the principal’s comments. The principal stated,
The staff accomplish tasks through collaboration. We do not tell them ‘what’ to
do. We present the issues, problems, and concerns, provide them with the tools
and allow them to come up with solutions and “why” they have to do it. If they
cannot come up with ‘why’ they have to implement a program or complete a task,
we do not implement it. This is what I have learned from experience.
During the interview, the principal proudly quoted the following paragraph from their
most current WASC report that was created in collaboration of their staff:
Diamond High School has a clearly defined vision based on its students’ needs,
current educational research, and the belief that all students can learn at high
academic standards. Based on student achievement, Diamond High School
leadership and staff make decisions and initiate activities that focus on all students
achieving the expected schoolwide learning results (ESLRs) and academic
standards. The inspiration for Diamond High School’s vision statement came
about through a tree analogy activity and participation of all school staff.
The stakeholders perceived most of their school staff and faculty as highly collaborative
and believed the collaborative school culture facilitated developing the inclusion of students with
disabilities. As transformational charismatic, motivational, and considerate leaders, the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 68
stakeholders had high expectations and positive belief in their staff and their strengths in
collaboration. Likewise, they expected their staff to set similar norms, values ,and beliefs for
their students. The administrators and staff together created the policies and procedures in
addition to educational practices that valued all students and endeavored to meet all students’
educational needs, including students with disabilities. During several observations of the school
and their staff meetings, collaboration was strongly seen among the administrative team
members, teachers, other staff such as counselors, custodians, students, and across all these
groups. The interviewees revealed that the classroom instructions were highly encouraged to be
focused on collaborative group work between students and preparing group projects, which
allowed students to learn to complete tasks collaboratively. Another example of collaboration
between teachers of the same studies that was revealed during one of the observations was the
sharing of admirable lesson plans. The administrators provided teachers extended time to
prepare good lesson plans that were shared through digital folders. The teachers utilized them as
they were originally developed or made modifications to meet the needs of their students. This
was an example of individual consideration factor of transformational leadership. The
stakeholders supported the followers by coaching, advising, and facilitating their individual and
group needs. These leadership practices set the tone for the supportive climate of the school.
Philosophy and Commitment
The subjects of this study completed the Transformational Leadership Survey. The
following table depicts the result of the survey.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 69
Table 4
Transformational Leadership Survey Results
Factors Questions Total
Charisma I go out of my way to make my staff feel good to be around
I have an ever-expanding network of people who trust and rely upon me
People listen to my ideas because of my skills, knowledge, personality
12
Social I help others with their self-development
I provide challenges for my team members to help them grow
I provide an empathic shoulder when others need help
11
Vision I help others to understand my vision through the use of tools, images
I use simple words, images, symbols to convey what we should do
I help others with new ways of looking at new and complex ideas
11
Transactional I ensure others get recognition/rewards when achieve difficult goals
I manage others by setting standards that we all agree with
I ensure poor performance is corrected
5

Delegation I let others work in the manner that they want
I rarely give directions/guidance to others if I sense they can achieve
their goals
As long as things are going smoothly, I am satisfied
4

Execution I get things done
I provide coaching so my team members know how they are doing
I monitor all projects to ensure the team meets it’s goals
3

The results of the survey unanimously indicated that the stakeholders were highly
charismatic, visionary, and inspirational. Charismatic leaders are strong role models with values
that make them appealing and competent to their followers (Northouse, 2007). On the survey,
the stakeholders marked (a) they made their staff feel good to be around them, (b) they had
extended number of followers who trusted them, and (c) their staff followed them because of
their knowledge and skills. The stakeholders likewise scored high on visionary leader
statements. They believed (a) their presentation through images and stories appealed to their
staff, (b) their use of simple language through images and symbols were effective, and (c) their
new and simple ways of looking into complex ideas interested their followers. One of the
stakeholders affirmed these characteristics of transformational leaders in the interview:
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 70
Our principal reminds us regularly that there are always several ways to solve a problem.
We need to think outside the box and find the best way that benefits our students. We
need to keep our focus on what is the best for all our students.
The principal used the words “think outside the box,” and it was recognized by all other
interviewees. This principal with superlative transformational leadership skills intellectually
stimulated the other leaders and the staff to challenge their beliefs and contrive innovative
approaches when planning or just dealing with issues.
When completing the Transformational Leadership Survey, the participants also scored
high on possessing social and inspirational characteristics. They responded that (a) they helped
their staff to develop themselves, (b) supported them to grow professionally, and (c) they were
companionate and sympathetic with staff when needed.
The principal added during the interview that, when hiring assistant principals, she
specifically picked candidates with strong characteristics of transformational leadership and who
were sympathetic to the collaborative and positive inclusive culture of the school. The principal
believed that the collaborative inclusive culture of the school was a philosophy that all the
administrators needed to have in common to lead the school in the same direction and avoid a
power struggle. She commented,
We need to be committed to our belief that all students can learn. When we agree that all
students can learn, then that becomes our new normal. As a principal, I try hard to bring
clarity in the introduction of new ideas, reinforce the ideals through the process, and lead
my staff to work collaboratively in the process. We work together and know that some
things are negotiable and some other decisions are non-negotiable, but we are transparent
and clarify the reasons.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 71
The stakeholders agreed that commitment to maintaining and improving the inclusive
school culture was a vital characteristic necessary for both administrators and staff. The special
education teacher added that, every year, discussions about the role of general education and
special education teachers emerged, but the disagreements were more challenging at the
beginning, when they were in the developing stages of the inclusive culture. Through the years,
the school members learned from their experiences and tried to address the challenges with
support from their administrators. This was an example of the principal’s skills in inspirational
motivation factor of the transformational leadership. She was committed to lead the school
following the legal mandates for inclusion of students with disabilities and used her skills to
inspire her followers to develop similar dedication to the organization.
The school members, likewise, received ongoing training. One of these interventions
was starting the multi-year plan to learn and implement the professional learning communities
(PLCs) that promoted the collaborative inclusive culture. Other professional developments with
a specific focus on inclusion for students with disabilities were several pieces of training
provided by Murawski (2009). Further training for the inclusion of students with disabilities was
provided locally by the school’s or the district’s learning leaders or special education
professionals.
The staff requested trainings in specific areas or conveyed concerns to the leadership
team. The administrators practiced individual consideration to support their followers by
listening to them carefully and striving to sustain their needs. One interviewee noted that,
usually, the choice of professional development sessions was delegated to the staff and coached
by the leaders. This practice empowered the followers to feel actualized and pledge increased
commitment as they developed a sense of ownership in the subject.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 72
Discussion of Research Question One
Collaborative school culture was supported by a favorable philosophy and commitment.
The stakeholders reported their principal’s visionary transformational leadership skills
contributed to their collaborative and inclusive school culture. The principal had taken over the
school after a previous principal with similar beliefs had started promoting the collaborative
culture. The latter principal had been leading the school for about 10 years with a similar
philosophy. The consistency allowed her to develop the norms, values, and beliefs that formed
the collaborative culture of this high school. Muhammad (2009) describes a receptive school
culture as
- Educators have an unwavering belief in the ability of all their students to achieve
success, and they pass that belief on to others in overt and covert ways.
- Educators create policies and procedures and adopt practices that support their
belief in every student’s ability. (p. 20)
Muhammad’s (2009) recommendations were evident at this school. Ongoing
communication through different modalities such as emails, meetings, common lunch or breaks,
and digital sharing of notes and documents was part of their routine. They shared lesson plans
along with instructional and classroom management strategies and observed each other’s
classrooms to provide recommendations to the peers. The staff developed the vision and mission
of the school collectively to reflect the collaborative and inclusive culture of their school with an
emphasis on meeting the needs of all students. The policies and procedures of the school were
developed with the help and input of the staff supported by the administrators as a unifying
force. The administrators guided the staff in the right direction and celebrated the success of
their members regularly to inspire, motivate, and promote their positive values. The stakeholders
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 73
perceived the inclusion of students with disabilities in this high school as a strand of their school
culture that was made possible by their staff and visionary administrators who considered the
collaborative inclusive school culture as part of their norm.
Transformational leadership’s four factors of idealized influence, inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration were all clearly evident in the
practices of the leadership team. They empowered their followers by delegating responsibilities
and valuing their professional knowledge when including them in developing the school’s
mission and vision. The leaders maintained collaborative school culture by modeling and setting
high expectations in moral and ethical conduct for their followers to follow the leaders’ path. An
example of these leadership practices was when the leaders followed the legal mandates of
inclusion and implemented staff-created school and discipline policies. The leaders practiced
inspirational motivation leadership by appealing to the followers’ emotions and encouraging
them to achieve more. For example, the leaders created a committee to celebrate achievements
of the followers and committed to implementing rituals through different modalities such as the
school’s newspaper or website, developed by the students and staff.
Research Question 2
The second research question pertained to practices key stakeholders identified as
practices that promote the inclusion of students with disabilities and receptive school culture.
This study examined the role of the stakeholders in leading and influencing the inclusion of
students with disabilities and promoting a receptive school culture. Bass (1985) suggested that
transformational leaders addressed the needs of their followers and supported them to reach their
maximum potential. Transformational leaders possess charismatic and inspirational
characteristics with intellectual stimulation skills that motivate their followers, redirecting their
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 74
perceptions to achieve higher level goals (Bass, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1990). The administrators
with transformational leadership skills and clear vision facilitated the promotion of an inclusive
culture. The findings identified the two comprehensive leading practices of institutional support
and instructional leadership that encouraged the inclusion of students with disabilities and
advanced receptive school cultures.
Institutional Support
From the interviews, surveys, and observations, several leadership skills and strategies
were used by the stakeholders that supported the inclusion of students with disabilities and
maintained an inclusive school culture. These subcategories were assembled under the umbrella
category of institutional support. All seven categories were associated with the two or more of
the transformational leadership factors. The seven subcategories are discussed below.
Promoting receptive school culture. Muhammad (2009) explained the receptive school
culture as when the staff believed that all students had the ability to learn and actively
participated in activities exhibiting progress and success (p. 20). The special education
department chair commented during the interview,
When we started with inclusion and scheduling students in the general education classes,
the general education teachers used to call the special education students as my students
while the gened students were theirs. Now, they don’t do it anymore. They rarely use
my and your students.
According to the observation data, the teachers used the term “our students” when
referring to students with special needs. One of the interviewees posited that inclusion was their
“new normal” and explained that the staff did not raise concerns about why the students should
be included but discussed the strategies needed to support all the students. The principal stated,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 75
I always drop by when teachers are planning. You know, it is usually one or two gened
teachers and a special education teacher working together. They plan two or three levels
of lesson plans to meet the needs of their students. Some students without IEPs need
more explicit instruction than the special education students. Teachers plan the lessons
according to their students’ needs, not if they are general or special education students.
The transformational leadership of this school set the basis for a receptive school culture
by including all staff in the process of decision making, caring for individual needs,
demonstrating individual consideration and inspirational motivation factors of the transformation
leadership framework. One of the assistant principals explained,
We never demanded the staff implement an idea or strategy. The teachers agree on why
they are doing it and are given a choice to participate in developing the guidelines. This
is a daily routine for us. The teachers and staff are working together to make decisions.
These leadership skills were visible in practices such as delegating responsibilities to
allow the followers grow and providing supportive climate for the followers to share their ideas
and concerns to meet their needs. The special education department chair described,
The administrators and staff include the special education staff in all the staff
developments and encourage us to be involved. When we go to trainings, we come back
and present it for the rest of the staff just like general ed teachers. Our administrators
encourage us to plan assemblies or other extracurricular activities like different sports.
They also urge us to include the students in the process.
The followers were listened to carefully when working collaboratively with peers and felt
uplifted when their voices were heard. By acting as caring and inclusive leadership skills, the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 76
staff was encouraged and motivated to emulate the behaviors of their leaders to act similarly
considerate for their students and colleagues. One of the assistant principals said,
When I first started working here, my principal told me to observe and recognize the hard
work that the staff is doing. She told me I have to praise at least three teachers every day,
if not more. She also said that I have to be careful and always use caring words to staff
because the students are watching. I need to be a role model for the students and staff.
The celebration of the staff and students was another significant part of this school. The
results indicated that the teachers were regularly celebrated for their achievements and exhibited
high morale. It was observed in several occasions that students were equally praised and
continuously celebrated by adults. The students received praise for minor positive actions such
as an act of kindness to another student, or they were recognized as student of the month for the
school, classrooms, and multiple other reasons receiving awards. The principal stated,
We have weekly and monthly student recognition for different reasons such as behavior,
act of kindness, exceeding expectations in classes, outmost improved behaviors etc. You
know, this is part of our Positive Behavior Interventions and Support (PBIS) that we have
been doing for the third year now. When staff see that the students are doing something
good, they give them tokens and then we have weekly drawings. We also have our
newspaper and site. We recognize good work of adults and staff in there.
The school had a monthly newspaper developed by the students, an official website, and
several other digital communication sites such as Twitter where the celebrations of favorable
performance of both staff and teachers were regularly shared with the school community. The
celebratory practices were examples of inspirational motivation factor of the transformation
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 77
framework. Its intention was to motivate the followers to become committed to the organization
and share the vision and enhance the team spirit and achievement.
Open communication and collaboration. Another area of significance observed was
the maintenance of ongoing communication and collaboration between all participants of the
school. Continuous communication was maintained through announcements, flyers, the school
newspaper, meetings, and several digital sources such as emails, school website, Facebook and
Twitter pages. The majority of the teachers had classroom websites utilized to facilitate
instruction support or communicate with their students and parents. The special education
teacher noted,
The special ed teachers have their iPad with them all the time when they go to inclusion
classes. They use the iPad to email parents, enter grades, post homework, and email
colleagues about students. Thinking back, I don’t know how we survived without the
technology that we have now. It saves so much time.
Organizational transparency was apparent during observations. The staff seemed
comfortable sharing their questions and concerns during meetings with continued collaboration
and problem solving together with their peers. For example, at one of the staff meetings, a
teacher raised her concern about students’ behavior problems in her classroom. She complained
that, when the problem students were sent to the office, they did not receive appropriate
consequences. She stated,
When I send a student down to the office because for example the student is using his cell
phone and doesn’t give it up when I tell him to give it to me and do the class work, you
either have him sit in the office and play on his cell phone or socialize with other students
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 78
sent to the office. Sometimes, you just send them back to class. This makes my
classroom management very difficult.
After discussions, the staff and administrators decided to start a committee to address the
discipline issues. The administrators were part of the team working with the teachers and staff
addressing the concerns. The special education department chair noted,
Our principal believes in positive behavior intervention and addresses the issues by
preventive approaches and warnings. She has a private admin board with trouble kids’
pictures that may have behavior problems or at risk of not graduating. Then she keeps
close eye on them, does preventive daily meetings with them and reward them for their
good work.
Another example of positive behavior management was observed with low-performing
educators. The principal’s practice was to hold multiple conferences with the low-performing
teachers to identify the concerns, direct them to set goals and provide guidance to address their
needs. The principal explained,
At the beginning of the year, I identify the teachers and staff who may need
improvement. I get together with my admin team and divide the low performing staff
between us. It is usually not more than two or three for each admin, otherwise it is not
manageable. All admin should schedule weekly classroom visits. I tell them to have
plenty words of encouragements and a few improvements for their handpicked staff.
The leaders’ practices of allowing the followers to freely share their thoughts and
collaboratively engage in problem solving through teamwork was another example of
transformational leadership. The intellectual stimulation and individual consideration factors of
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 79
transformational leadership refer to the characteristics of leaders who address individuals’ needs
and solved problems through teamwork, thus providing supportive climate.
Collaboration between the special education and general education teachers took place on
a daily basis. Some teachers preferred to maintain digital communication through emails,
Google documents, and other programs while others preferred to meet in person during breaks,
before or after school, or during their free preparation periods to plan for instruction or discuss
students’ progress and needs. The leadership team believed that, through collaboration, the
followers would enhance the team spirit and become more committed to the shared vision of the
school.
Assemble inclusion facilitators. Inclusion facilitators were a group of credentialed
special education teachers and paraprofessional or adult assistants who provided support for
students with disabilities. The principal explained,
The sped teachers are not classroom teachers who provide watered down instruction and
babysit the students. They are knowledgeable instruction facilitators who are skilled in
modifying instruction, behavior management, and identifying and addressing students’
needs. Seriously, we couldn’t do without them. They even support some of the students
who don’t have IEPs. They are amazing.
The principal described that the special education teachers and support staff members’
roles had transformed from being isolated in a classroom providing modified instruction for a
group of students with disabilities into inclusion facilitators who delivered specialized academic
instruction to the students with disabilities inside the general education classrooms in
collaboration with the general education teachers. Special education teachers supported general
education classes that had students with disabilities. The teachers and administrators together
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 80
decided if a special education teacher went to a general education class during the whole or part
of the class period or a support staff member could meet the needs of the students. The focus of
all members was to meet the needs of the students who needed extended support to progress.
First, the type of the support needed was identified collaboratively with the team and then a plan
was set on the intensity and duration of the service and on who should provide the support. Once
more, the observation data on staff who were collaborating and emulating their leaders’
behaviors revealed the intellectual stimulation factor of the transformational leadership.
The majority of the students with disabilities attended inclusion classes for most of their
day. To provide a continuum of services, according to legal mandates, some IEP teams had
decided that the needs of some students were better met in a classroom with fewer students,
outside the general education classroom. These students attended one or two classes that were
instructed by a credentialed special education teacher and provided instruction with the use of
appropriate accommodations and modifications. Additionally, special education teachers had a
period referred to as “resource lab” where the enrolled students with disabilities received
additional instruction intervention for lessons learned in the general education classes, or the
teachers addressed the students’ other needs resulting from their disabilities. This limited group
of students received instruction in a separate setting during one or two periods but were included
with their peers the rest of the school day and monitored by the inclusion facilitators. This was
an example of individual considerations of transformational leadership. The leaders modeled the
supportive practices and the educators followed their leaders’ conduct in meeting their students’
individual needs by supporting and providing individualized services for their students.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 81
Plan inclusive master schedule. The principal noted that planning a master school
schedule that promoted inclusion classes and used the teachers and supported the staff effectively
was a challenging but imperative task. She said,
To tell you the truth, planning the master schedule is a nightmare! But I get help from
the counselors, special education and general education teachers, and all administrators.
Most of the times, we have to be creative and think outside the box. Otherwise, it does
not happen. We can never make everyone happy but we try to do our best to make sure
the students benefit, while we keep everyone happy.
The master schedule was planned in collaboration with participating general and special
education teachers. It was highly recommended and preferred that the collaborating general
education and special education teachers had common lesson preparation periods, which gave
them the time and opportunity to prepare instruction and support for their students together. The
principal’s recommendation was to start planning the special education and inclusion classes first
before incorporating the other classes into the challenging task of preparing the master schedule.
The special education department chair with the most years of experience with the inclusion of
students with disabilities suggested two types of planning the master schedules. The first method
was to determine the classes and assign the teachers to the courses before distributing the
students into the classes. The second method was to schedule the students’ classes according to
their requests and need, group them into classes, and then add the teachers. The stakeholders
suggested that the second method was more student-focused but made it difficult for the teachers
to teach their favorite subjects or have a common teacher preparation time with the collaborating
teachers. Generally, the major concern of all participants was the lack of time to collaborate.
The special education teacher noted,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 82
When we get together to plan the master schedule, we think carefully and try hard to
make sure there is time for the general and special education teachers to collaborate
together. This is a major concern for all our teaches.
One of the interviewees noted that it was impossible to meet all participants’ preparation
time requests, but a well-designed master schedule should meet the needs of all students,
including students with disabilities. Additionally, the staffing numbers was the main concern for
the administrators as they had to balance the number of staff provided by the district with their
programs and the services required by the students. The administrators believed the increased
number of staff members facilitated the planning of the master schedule. The principal added,
The years that I had more adult support, planning the master schedule was much easier.
The district keeps pushing us to work with less and less staff but meet the needs of all
students and implement inclusion. It doesn’t work that way. My teachers have
sometimes right to complain. If the teachers don’t have time to collaborate, the
information falls through the cracks and it is the students who lose. Teachers also get
burned out and leave or change jobs.
It was reported that there was increased flexibility in planning the master schedule when
the school had more students, but, as the number of the students dwindled in the previous few
years, the district assigned fewer special education teachers to the school. The staffing reduction
made planning for inclusion classes more challenging. The transformational leadership factors
existed but were more covert in the area of planning an inclusive master schedule. The planning
leadership team was striving to meet the needs of their followers by considering the followers’
special schedule requests and maintaining their motivation and commitment.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 83
Develop clear discipline policies. This was another area that was strongly advised by
the stakeholders. The school administrators had learned through experience that having clear
discipline policies was essential for maintaining the inclusion of students with disabilities and
maintaining a receptive school culture. The findings indicated that the school was using the
Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) they started implementing for the previous
few years. Through schoolwide PBIS strategies, the staff had learned to take non-punitive
measures that focused on proactive approaches and focused on students’ positive behaviors. The
teachers collaboratively planned the positive behaviors they needed to promote and reward the
students for following the good behavior guidelines. The school’s positive behavior intervention
plan was highly focused on developing a relationship and encouraging to raise student royalty.
The teachers likewise developed clear discipline policies with a few limited restrictions that were
important for the safety of the adults and students. These few restrictive discipline policies were
clearly defined and implemented religiously throughout the school.
Transformational leadership skills of the stakeholders were evident in all four factors of
the framework. Leaders were acting as role models and had high expectations for ethical and
moral conduct to fairly implement the discipline policies. They needed to innovative approaches
to deal with discipline issues, but they had to be understanding and supportive of the individuals’
needs.
Active participation in individual education programs. Another factor identified that
promoted inclusion of students with disabilities and a receptive school culture was the active
participation of the administrators in the process of the IEPs. The administrators of this school
participated in the IEPs of all students with disabilities and knew their needs and challenges.
The administrators closely reviewed every IEP and supported the special education teachers,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 84
who drafted the IEPs with additional recommendations. They were active participants of the IEP
teams. The administrators followed a behavior plan that was developed by the IEP team and
clearly explained how to encourage students with positive pressure and high expectations
described. The behavior plans were found very effective for managing the behaviors challenges
of some students. One of the assistant principals explained,
IEPs are legal documents and very difficult to do it well. My experience is that if I leave
it to only the special education teacher to do all the work, the district finds multiple
mistakes and the school gets into trouble. When we work together in developing the IEP,
paperwork improves. Also, most students who are sent to the office are students who
have behavior support plans. If I am assigning behavior consequences, I need to follow
the directions noted on the student’s behavior support plan.
The administrators’ extensive knowledge about the students with disabilities helped the
leadership team to understand the students better and guide the school teams who worked
directly with the students with valuable advice as needed. Idealized influence, intellectual
stimulation, and individual consideration factors of transformational leadership were evident in
the leaders’ practices. By actively participating in the IEP meetings and process, the leaders
were providing supportive climate for both students and staff, setting high expectations for moral
and ethical conduct, and engaged in problem solving when some members of the IEP team
disagreed with the recommendations of the IEP.
Promote parent involvement. The stakeholders recognized parent involvement as a
necessary component of the school’s receptive school culture. They believed parent involvement
helped better understand the students and assemble more effective teams to support the students.
One of the administrators explained,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 85
I need to know the students’ history before implementing consequences for their
unacceptable behaviors. Sometimes after I talk to the parent, I find out that they are
homeless or have economic challenges that are effecting the students. Some students go
home to an empty house because their single parent for example is working until late at
night. Sometimes some students have to take care or their siblings and don’t have time to
do their homework. There are so many reason that I have learned not to judge before
getting more information about the students.
Increased understanding of the students’ needs allowed the teams to plan efficient
academic instruction and addressed the students’ social and emotional needs systematically.
Additionally, the stakeholders agreed, according to their professional experience, that parent
involvement helped advance the students’ academic performance, students’ behaviors and
participation improved and punitive punishments decreased significantly. The transformational
leadership skills of the stakeholders were observed in the area of providing supportive climate
for the students, and engage in problem solving to remove the barriers and help all students,
including students with disabilities succeed.
Instructional Leadership
The second comprehensive leading practice arising from this study was the instructional
leadership skills of the administrators. As a result of descriptive coding analysis and inductive
analysis approach, the following two areas of professional development and data collection and
accountability emerged.
Professional development. The special education teacher and department chair
described,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 86
Professional developments are never enough. We receive them all the time, at least twice
per year but it is still not enough. I think both my sped and gened colleagues ask for
continuous PDs, specially in planning lesson plans and instruction to support all students
like differentiation.
The teachers received professional development in different areas that supported
inclusion and inclusive school culture, as reported by the principal. The teachers attended
professional development both on site or outside the school per their request or as it was
facilitated through the school or district. The administrators regularly encouraged research-based
instructional practices. The administrators provided support in the areas of their expertise and
were supportive of new ideas and recommendations communicated to them. The schoolwide
professional development sessions recognized were PBIS, PLCs, critical thinking, Advancement
Via Individual Determination, reading apprenticeship, love and logic, and co-teaching. The
PBIS and PLCs were in progress for a few years and were planned to continue in the future. The
co-teaching training was provided for the staff a few years prior by Murawski (2009), but some
veteran teachers with extended experience in inclusion had used the materials from their training
and continued sharing their expertise with others who needed support with inclusion at their
school. The assistant principal explained,
The teachers completed a small school wide survey last year and most of them believed
that the trainings they received was useful but not enough. They need and are asking for
more training. However, more training means we need more money and more time. That
is why we need support from the district.
The stakeholders shared that these professional development sessions, in addition to some
brief pieces of training during staff development sessions, had supported and advanced them in
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 87
creating a positive inclusive school culture. However, all stakeholders believed that the need for
additional professional development was a recurrent topic for the staff and it was needed to
further improve the instruction in the inclusion classes with students who had a wide variety of
needs. One of the interviewees explained,
The teachers are asking for more training on how to assign grades to some students with
disabilities in the general education classroom. They are asking on how to grade students
if the curriculum is significantly modified to meet the needs of the students.
By facilitating in-service for teachers, the leaders coached the staff with support and
guidance to meet their needs, aligned with transformational leadership factor of individualized
consideration. The administrators created a supportive climate for their followers and listened to
their followers’ needs.
Instruction based on data collection and accountability. This area was significant to
note as it emerged in multiple observations and interviews. The practice of instruction based on
data collection commenced many years prior, but the school staff agreed to focus on this practice
as inclusion of students with disabilities developed in general education classes. The principal
explained,
We learned from the special education practices and wrote IEPs for the school and all of
us. IEP goals thought us through the years to measure our baseline, set goals and
benchmarks and try to reach them. That is why we need data collection to measure our
performance and celebrate progress.
In addition, the IEPs of the students with disabilities required the teachers to collect data
to report for the IEPs. As this practice grew, the teachers realized that accurate data shared with
both general and special education students helped the students monitor their progress and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 88
improve their performance. Additionally, based on the school-wide goals, the teachers had the
option to work collaboratively in pairs to set instructional goals, complete observations, and
evaluate each other based on collected data. The administrators reported that the staff highly
favored this practice as their peers, instead of the administrators, evaluated them and they
avoided the fear of administrative reviews. The unintended benefit of this practice was
providing accountability on instruction. The stakeholders exhibited skills that supported the
students and staff, as another example of transformational leadership.
Discussion of Research Question Two
The second research question focused on the key stakeholders and the practices they
identified that facilitated inclusion of students with disabilities and promoted a receptive school
culture. According to the findings, the key stakeholders identified institutional support and
instructional leadership as the fundamental practices to promote an inclusive and receptive
school culture. Seven practices were identified under the broad leading category of institutional
support. These were required nuts and bolts that facilitated instruction and student learning. The
seven elements helped create an environment in this organization that placed the mental health
and growth of its members ahead of students’ test scores. The school celebrated the success of
the staff and the students and invested in its human resources. The administrators at this school
practiced the four factors of the transformational leadership by providing supportive school
climate through institutional support and instructional leadership.
Powerful collaboration and open communication complemented the promotion of
receptive school culture as one of the elements. The members of this organization openly
communicated their concerns without fear of reprisal. Open communication and collaboration
were evident throughout the organization at all levels, among administrators, staff, students, and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 89
parents. The school was managed and decisions were made through committees and taskforces
consisting of interested members of the school. The members of the various teams were
supported by the administrators who sustained proper reinforcement, such as assembling the
inclusion facilitators who helped move forward the inclusion of students with disabilities. The
school members recognized parent involvement as a necessary factor and encouraged including
parent representatives in different taskforces for decision making. Another significant factor was
planning an appropriate master schedule that was a conduit to increased collaboration and a
significant factor in promoting the inclusive culture developed by the vision and mission of this
school.
The last two necessary practices recognized under the institutional support sub-theme
were the administrators’ knowledge and active participation in the students with disabilities’
challenges in addition to developing and implementing clear discipline policies. Instructional
leadership was the second sub-theme. Professional development was identified as the essential
subcategory of the instructional leadership after institutional support. The stakeholders of this
study unanimously agreed that annual professional development was necessary for the teachers
and staff. Professional development in different pertinent areas and subjects encouraged
research-based instructional practices in both management and instruction. This was an area
strongly sought by the staff. The stakeholders believed that this institutional support and
instructional leadership practices were necessary practices in promoting inclusion of students
with disabilities and promoting a receptive school culture.
Findings
The study found close association between the transformational leadership theoretical
framework and the characteristic and practices of the participants who strived to promote a high
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 90
school environment receptive to inclusion of students with disabilities. The findings included the
key stakeholders’ perceptions of inclusive school culture and how they recognized students with
disabilities as part of the organization. Next, the findings were summarized into two general
areas of (a) collaborative school culture and (b) philosophy and commitment to answer the first
research question. Additionally, the two comprehensive areas of (a) institutional support and (b)
instructional leadership answered the second research question that looked for key practices
necessary in supporting a receptive school culture inclusive of students with disabilities. These
findings were in line with the four dynamic factors of transformational leadership:
Factor 1: Charisma or Idealized Influence. Leaders who are role models and whose
followers trust them and want to emulate them. Leaders have high standards and provide a
vision and sense of mission to the followers and are deeply respected.
Factor 2: Inspiration or Inspirational Motivation. Leaders in this category
communicate high expectations to followers, inspire followers to commit to the shared vision of
the organization, and enhance team spirit.
Factor 3: Intellectual Stimulation. Leaders who stimulate followers to be creative and
innovative and to transform their leaders and organization with them. These leaders support and
encourage followers to think independently and engage in problem-solving.
Factor 4: Individualized Consideration. These leaders provide a supportive climate
and listen to the followers’ needs. They operate as coaches, delegate responsibilities to help
followers grow through personal challenges, and give affiliation for some members while
directing others.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 91
Transformational leadership theory assumes leaders produce greater effects and move the
followers to accomplish more than what is usually expected of them. They become motivated to
transcend their self-interest for the good of the group or organization (Bass & Avolio, 1990).
Summary
Findings identified the perceptions of key stakeholders and practices that promoted
inclusion of students with disabilities in a comprehensive high school. The key stakeholders,
with the leadership of the principal at this high school, were visionary leaders who promoted
shared leadership and collaborative school culture. The key stakeholders supported a healthy
school culture by focusing on promoting caring and celebratory environment where the members
were praised for their achievement. This study focused on the behaviors and the leadership
practices of the stakeholders through the lens of transformational leadership and its four factors
of idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual
consideration.
The leadership team was sensible to the needs of the members and believed addressing
their needs was necessary for the health of the organization. The key stakeholders perceived
promoting an inclusive school culture as the beginning steps in the inclusion of students with
disabilities. Institutional support, including collaboration, communication, and commitment ,was
encouraged to foster transparency and minimal confusion. In addition to institutional support,
instructional leadership was recognized as a critical factor to promote inclusion. The
stakeholders identified professional development as another essential factor. The stakeholders
were committed to facilitating professional development and support the staff in using research-
based innovative instructional strategies that helped address the needs of all students with diverse
needs.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 92
The transformational theory framework explained the practices of the leadership team in
this school. The leaders set high expectations for ethical and moral conduct and acted as role
models for their followers to mimic the practices of their leaders and commit to the
organization’s vision and mission. The leaders encouraged teamwork and provided supportive
climate for their followers to grow and help meet the needs of all students, including students
with disabilities in inclusion.
Themes Not Explained by the Framework
As explained in the literature review, in Chapter Two, Bass (1985) and Burns (1978)
posited that transformational leadership theory focuses on the leaders’ behaviors that help
improve the performance of the followers. These leaders are effective at motivating the
followers and supported them in reaching their fullest potential. Consequently, this
transformational theory proves appropriate to explain the practices and behaviors of school
administrators. Northouse (2002) suggested that transformational leadership could be used to
change an entire culture. This study attested that transformational leadership could also be used
to change the culture of a school and help the members foster an inclusive culture.
The themes that remained untouched by the framework were clear expectations and
consistency. The participants noted the importance of having clear expectations for followers.
Communication and collaboration were clearly present in the practices of the leaders and
followers in this school, but, sometimes, clear expectations were missing due to concise but
important directives that gave the followers clear guidelines. Likewise, the consistency of
practices was questioned by the followers because of frequent change in leadership. The
principal and the special education department chair had worked at this school for many years,
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 93
but the assistant principals had changed several times. The staff feared that the leadership team
may change and new leaders would have different practices and expectations.
Lastly, transformational leadership theory’s four factors completely explained the
practices of the stakeholders, however, the four factors overlapped, making it difficult to
distinguish the differences. This was noted by Tracey and Hinkin (1998), described in detail by
the literature in Chapter Three. However, some critics suggested that transformational leadership
was a personality trait. This study’s findings explained that the principal was the
transformational leader, but she encouraged the assistant principals and the special education
department chair to change their practices and employ transformational leadership skills. The
principal was able to teach the other participants the skills needed to learn transformational
leadership practices.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 94
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
The role of school administrators has changed from disciplinarians and authoritarian
managers who governed the schools for many centuries into increased complex institutional and
instructional leaders who need to transform the public school and make it accessible to all
students, including those with unique and diverse needs. Vygotsky (1978), the mastermind of
constructivist theory, believed that the developmental principles of all children were alike
regardless of their disabilities and advocated educating all students together in the same
environment. It was explicitly emphasized that separating the students with special needs from
their non-disabled peers for academic classes or their social environment may impede the
cognitive development of both students with and without disabilities (Wang, Bruce, & Hughes,
2011). However, teachers were resistant towards providing instruction to students with
disabilities. They argued that it was the responsibility of the special education teachers to deliver
instruction to students who required specialized academic instruction. Support and effective
leadership skills of the administrators and the leadership team could lessen the general education
teachers’ fear of unknown and opposition to providing instruction to all students (Nichols &
Sheffield, 2014). The inclusion movement started with Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, but
it was strengthened by IDEA in 2004 with mandates emphasizing the LRE and FAPE for
students with disabilities (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Although these mandates have
been around for more than 50 years, schools have interpreted the laws differently, and, in
general, they have been slow in complying to the regulation. This case study examined the role
of a suburban high school’s key stakeholders in following the legal mandates and how they
promoted the transformation of the longstanding traditional school culture into an organization
with increased understanding and acceptance of inclusion of students with disabilities.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 95
This chapter provides an overview of this study with a summary of findings guided by
two research questions. In closing, implications for practice and recommendations are discussed
followed by a conclusion.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the key stakeholder’s role in creating and
promoting an educational environment amenable to inclusion of students with disabilities not
only by placing them in general education classes but by promoting their active participation and
learning, and by meeting the students’ individual needs. Additionally, looking through the lens
of transformational leadership theory, this study sought to find the association between the
conceptual framework and the school administrators’ practices. Participants recognized as the
key stakeholders were the principal, three assistant principals, and the special education
department chair at a comprehensive high school located in a suburban school district. The study
sought to identify the key stakeholder’s characteristics and effective leadership styles that
supported the inclusion of students with disabilities. Additionally, this study investigated the
necessary practices that facilitated the promotion of inclusive school culture associated with
transformational leadership four factors. The expectation was to use the findings in planning and
training of administrators in other secondary schools with similar demographics if possible to
promote inclusion.
Research Questions
Two research questions guided this study:
• What are the perceptions of key stakeholders about the inclusion of students with
disabilities in high school?
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 96
• What do key stakeholders identify as practices that promote the inclusion of students with
disabilities and receptive school culture?
Summary of the Findings
This qualitative study examined the role of the key stakeholders in developing a receptive
school culture and identifying the practices that supported the creation and maintenance of
effective inclusive practices for students with disabilities in a suburban high school. The high
school in this study began the inclusion of students with disabilities about 18 years prior with
only a few classes and gradually developed into an inclusive school culture that supported
diversity. This study answered two research questions on the perceptions of the key stakeholders
and on their practices contributing to the promotion of inclusion of students with disabilities.
Two comprehensive categories of institutional support and instructional leadership emerged.
The data highlighted the practices that promoted a receptive school culture and welcomed
students with different disabilities as equal partners with the general education peers in the
school. It also found that transformational leadership skills are guidelines in assisting secondary
school administrators in developing and maintaining an inclusive school culture and supporting
inclusion of students with disabilities.
Finding One: Providing Institutional Support
The transformational leadership skills of the key stakeholders had a significant role in
promoting an inclusive school culture and supporting the inclusion of students with disabilities.
The stakeholders focused on supporting and encouraging growth in their followers. They
stimulated the followers’ intellectual and problem-solving skills by involving them in the
decision making and management of the school. They motivated the followers to collaborate for
the success of their students, rather than self-interest. Kouzes and Posner (1987, 2002) identified
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 97
five characteristics of successful leaders as model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the
process, enable others to act, and encourage the heart. The stakeholders had embraced these
characteristics and led the school accordingly.
Promoting receptive school culture. Positive inclusive school culture was recognized
as one of the most significant components of this school. Muhammad (2009) explained school
culture is as the way individuals behave. The leaders of this school promoted a receptive school
culture by demonstrating collaboration and commitment. The staff had bought into the
philosophy of collaboration, and the school was managed through teams represented by
administrators, staff, and, when possible, students and parents. Receptive school culture was
promoted through celebrating success and boosting morale and productivity of the staff.
Honoring traditions, celebrations, appreciations and recognition of all members, including the
adults and students as part of their everyday practices. The guidelines were set clearly with
minimal confusion and staff seemed comfortable to share their ideas and opinions without fear of
being reprimanded. Trust and confidence were visible as the team members were assigned roles
and tangible support was provided when requested. The staff seemed to have personal
connections to school, and some participated in after-school events with their families.
Collaboration and Communication. A collaborative school vision and mission was
developed followed by all the members. The mentality was that all students could learn and the
inclusive culture was reflected in the school’s mission. The original driving force of this
mentality was the principal, but with her strong transformational leadership skills, she had
extended these skills to the rest of the leadership team. Collaboration and communication was
the basis of this organization, and institutional transparency was distinctly evident. The master
schedule was planned with collaboration time embedded for teachers during the day. Most of the
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 98
general and special education teachers engaged in the inclusion of students with disabilities had
common planning time that supported collaboration. The teachers collaborated in person or
through emails and other digital tools. The lesson plans were mostly created by the general
education teachers and reviewed by the special education teacher to include differentiation tools
and allow access for students with various needs. They had lesson plan digital folders where the
teachers shared their lesson plans to support other teachers and save time. These were examples
of transformational leadership factors in individual consideration, intellectual stimulation,
inspirational motivation, and idealized influence.
The special education teachers were considered inclusion facilitators who provided
differentiated instructional support to the general education teachers. Students and instruction
was the focus of all staff and administrators. The inclusion facilitators’ time was divided into
different general education classes, according to the needs of students with disabilities. The
administrators were actively involved in the IEPs and participated in the development of these
documents. Lastly, parent involvement was encouraged and believed that it contributed to
students’ success.
Finding Two: Instructional Leadership
The school engaged in the continual professional development of various types and the
stakeholders supported the teachers in this area. The stakeholders and staff agreed that providing
instruction for students with a wide range of abilities and needs was a challenging task. At the
time of this study, the school was engaged in following multi-tier PBIS, and PLCs but the
teachers had received training in collaborative teaching and inclusion of students with
disabilities. Additionally, the teachers had received support and engaged in ongoing data
collection to guide their instruction. Accountability and high expectations set the bar for both
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 99
teacher and student performance. Teachers were paired up to collaborate, evaluate, and support
each other monitored by the leadership team and intervention was provided immediately as need.
As transformational leaders, the stakeholders practiced individual consideration by providing a
supportive and caring climate.
Implications for Practice
The key stakeholders had positive opinions of inclusion. They believed their
organization maintained a strong inclusive school culture, and they were proud of the inclusion
of students with disabilities. Two implications arise from this study:
1. The key stakeholders agreed that they might benefit from collecting data on the
perception of the other members of the school to use as a baseline for future improvement
goals.
2. There is further need for professional development in the area of inclusion teaching
strategies. The teachers were specifically interested in learning about differentiated
instruction and UDL.
These results may contribute to the literature on the inclusion of students with disabilities
and the development of a receptive school culture. The findings herein are recommended for
other organizations with similar characteristics. It may be challenging to duplicate the exact
practices; however, other high schools with developing inclusive culture and inclusion of
students with disabilities goals may benefit from employing some of the recommendations in this
study. Additionally, the school district of the participating school may use some of the
information in developing similar interventions in other schools or use the recommendations in
planning future training for their members.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 100
Recommendations for Future Study
Several recommendations for future research emerged during data collection and the
course of this study. The subjects were restricted to the four stakeholders.
1. Future study may focus on the perception of the staff, parents, and students regarding
inclusion and the school’s inclusive culture. Hehir and Katzman (2012) recommended
seven areas of focus to promote an inclusive school culture. This study examined three
of the seven critical areas: inclusive school vision, shared leadership, and collaboration.
2. Future study may focus on the remaining four areas of community and parent
involvement, innovative budget opportunities, instructional reforms, and UDL that were
not examined in this study.
3. Further research is needed to study the district’s vision and practices in promoting
inclusive environments in their high schools and the guidelines and support available to
advance the inclusion of students with disabilities. Transformational leadership skills of
the key stakeholders were found to be the most important practices in promoting an
inclusive school culture. A more comprehensive study can focus on the characteristics of
the leaders in an increased number of schools and examine the significance of
transformational leadership skills in promoting inclusive school culture.
Conclusions
Legal mandates have required the schools and districts to implement and expand
inclusion of students with disabilities for the last few decades. However, the education system
has been very slow in promoting and enforcing the inclusion of students with disabilities.
Vygotsky (1978) argued the benefits of educating all students in the same environment. It is
necessary that all schools and districts take the necessary actions in developing goals and
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 101
planning programs that promote inclusive cultures and provide education to all students,
including students with disabilities in an inclusive setting. Additionally, the transformational
leadership framework, as suggested in this study, has proven to be supportive of school
leadership practices in creating an inclusive culture. It may be used to develop and sustain
programs for inclusion of students with disabilities.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 102
REFERENCES
Administrators. (2017). In Merriam- W e bs t e r ’s online dictionary. Retrieved from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/administrators
Alquraini, T., & Gut, D. (2012). Critical components of successful inclusion of students with
severe disabilities: Literature review. International Journal of Special Education, 27(1),
42–59.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. § 12101 et seq. West 1993.
Avissar, G., Reiter, S., & Leyser, Y. (2003). Principals’ views and practices regarding inclusion:
The case of Israeli elementary school principals. European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 18(3), 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/0885625032000120233
Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in organizations.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational Dynamics, 13(3), 26–40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(85)90028-2
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the
vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-
2616(90)90061-S
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond.
Journal of European Industrial Training, 14(5), 21–27.
https://doi.org/10.1108/03090599010135122
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership and organizational culture.
Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1), 112–121.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 103
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Transformational leadership and organizational culture.
International Journal of Public Administration, 17(3-4), 541–554.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01900699408524907
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. New York, NY: Psychology
Press.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York, NY:
Harper.
Blase, J., & Kirby, P. C. (1992). The power of praise—A strategy for effective principals.
NASSP Bulletin, 76(548), 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263659207654809
Blatt, B. (1981). In and out of mental retardation: Essays on educability, disability, and human
policy. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to
theory and methods. New York NY: Pearson.
Bowers, C. (2009). Effectiveness of inclusion in an Indiana middle school (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (3379897)
Brotherson, M. J., Sheriff, G., Milburn, P., & Schertz, M. (2001). Elementary school principals
and their needs and issues for inclusive early childhood programs. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education, 21(1), 31–45.
https://doi.org/10.1177/027112140102100103
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
Bryman, A. (1992). Quantitative and qualitative research: Further reflections on their integration.
In J. Brannen (Ed.), Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research (pp. 57–78).
New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 104
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Cannella, G. S., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). Ethics, research regulations, and critical social science.
In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research (4th
ed., pp. 81-90). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Capper, C. A., Frattura, E., & Keyes, M. W. (2000) Meeting the needs of students of all abilities:
How leaders go beyond inclusion. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
Causton-Theoharis, J., & Theoharis, G. (2008). Creating inclusive schools for all students: An
education for children with disabilities that, as one principal puts it, offers 'nothing
separate, no special spaces, no special teachers. ’ Alexandria, VA: American Association
of School Administrators.
Causton-Theoharis, J., & Theoharis, G. (2009). Creating inclusive schools for all students.
Education Digest, 74(6), 43.
Carey, R. L. (2014). A cultural analysis of the achievement gap discourse: Challenging the
language and label used in the work of school reform. Urban Education, 49(4), 440–468.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085913507459
Collins, L., & White, G. P. (2001). Leading inclusive programs for all special education
students: A pre-service training program for principals. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education.
Corbin, J. M., & Straus, J. M. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures
for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 105
Danforth, S. (2008). John Dewey’s contributions to an educational philosophy of intellectual
disability. Educational Theory, 58(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
5446.2007.00275.x
Daresh, J. (2004). Mentoring school leaders: Professional promise or predictable problems?
Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 495–517.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04267114
DiPaola, M., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2004). School principals and
special education: Creating the context for academic success. Focus on Exceptional
Children, 37(1), 1–10.
Downing, J. (2010). Academic instruction for students with moderate to severe 156 intellectual
disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483350400
Downton, J. V. (1973). Rebel leadership: Commitment and charisma in the revolutionary
process. Free Press.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 (1975).
Falvey, M. A., Givner, C. C., & Kimm, C. (1995). Creating an inclusive school. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2012). Principal self-efficacy: Relations with burnout, job
satisfaction and motivation to quit. Social Psychology of Education: An International
Journal, 15(3), 295–320.
Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1996). What's worth fighting for in your school? (Rev. ed.). New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 106
Glaser, B. G. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with
description. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Goldstein, H. (2006). Toward inclusive schools for all children: Developing a synergistic social
learning curriculum. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Gordon, I., & Monastiriotis, V. (2006). Urban size, spatial segregation and inequality in
educational outcomes. Urban Studies, 43(1), 213–236.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980500409367
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry (Vol. 9). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A
review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1),
5–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X96032001002
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school
effectiveness: 1980‐1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157–191.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345980090203
Halvorsen, A. T., & Neary, T. (2009). Building inclusive schools: Tools and strategies for
success (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Harr-Robins, J., Song, M., Hurlburt, S., Pruce, C., Danielson, L., Garet, M., & Taylor, J. (2012).
The inclusion of students with disabilities in school accountability systems: Interim
report (NCEE 2012-4056). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation
and Regional Assistance.
Hauserman, C. P., & Stick, S. L. (2013). The leadership teachers want from principals:
Transformational. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue Canadienne de L ’É duc a t i on,
36(3), 184–203.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 107
Hehir, T., & Katzman, L. I. (2012). Effective inclusive schools: Designing successful schoolwide
programs (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Heppner, P. P., & Heppner, M. J. (2004). Writing and publishing your thesis, dissertation, and
research: A guide for students in the helping professions. Columbia, MO: Cengage
Learning.
Hoppey, D., & McLeskey, J. (2013). A case study of principal leadership in an effective
inclusive school. The Journal of Special Education, 46(4), 245–256.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466910390507
Horrocks, J. L., White, G., & Roberts, L. (2008). Principals’ attitudes regarding inclusion of
children with autism in Pennsylvania public schools. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 38(8), 1462–1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-007-0522-x
Idol, L. (2006). Toward inclusion of special education students in in general education: A
program evaluation of eight schools. Remedial and Special Education, 27(2), 77–94.
https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325060270020601
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, P.L. 105-17 and Part 300 Regulations, June 1997.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004)
Jorgensen, C. M., McSheehan, M., & Sonnenmoser, R. M. (2010). The beyond access model:
Promoting membership, participation, and learning for students with disabilities in the
general education classroom. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Kilanowski-Press, L., Foote, C. J., & Rinaldo, V. J. (2010). Inclusion classrooms and teachers: A
survey of current practices. International Journal of Special Education, 25(3), 43–56.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1987). Leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things
done in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 108
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). Seven lessons for leading the voyage to the future. In S.
R. Graves & T. G. Addington (Eds.), Life @ Work on Leadership (pp. 77–88). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kuhnert, K. W. (1994). Transforming leadership: Developing people through delegation. In B.
M. Bass & B. J. Avolio (Eds.), Improving organizational effectiveness through
transformational leadership (pp. 10-25). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Leedy, P., & Ormrod, J. (2010). Practical research planning and design (9th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson Education International.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000a). Principal and teacher leadership effects: A replication.
School Leadership & Management, 20(4), 415–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696963
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000b). The effects of different sources of leadership on student
engagement in school. In K. Riley & K. Seashore Louis (Eds.), Leadership for change
and school reform: International perspectives (pp. 50-66). New York, NY: Routledge
Falmer.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000c). The effects of transformational leadership on
organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational
Administration, 38(2), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230010320064
Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times.
Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Logan, B. E., & Wimer, G. (2013). Tracing inclusion: Determining teacher attitudes. Research in
Higher Education Journal, 20, 1–10.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 109
Lynch, L. M. (2012). Responsibilities for today’s principal: Implications for principal
preparation programs and principal certification policies. Rural Special Education
Quarterly, 31(2), 40–47.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From
research to results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What's good, what's not,
and how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483328591
McLaughlin, M. J., & Nolet, V. (2004). What every principal need to know about special
education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. L. (2007). Making differences ordinary in inclusive classrooms.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 42(3), 162–168.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512070420030501
McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. L. (2011). Educational programs for elementary students with
learning disabilities: Can they be both effective and inclusive? Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 26(1), 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00324.x
McLeskey, J., Rosenberg, M. S., & Westling, D. L. (2012). Inclusion: Effective practices for all
students. New York, NY: Pearson Higher Ed.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 110
Mees, G. W. (2008). The relationships among principal leadership, school culture, and student
achievement in Missouri middle schools (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses database. (3371083)
Milner, H. R., & Lomotey, K. (2014). Introduction. In H. R. Milner & K. Lomotey (Eds.),
Handbook of urban education (pp. xv–xxii). New York, NY: Routledge.
Muhammad, A. (2009). Transforming school culture: How to overcome staff division.
Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and interpretation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia, 348 F. Supp. 866 (Dist. Court, Dist. of
Columbia 1972).
Morse, R. (2008). The new high school rankings are here. Find out how the schools in your
region did. U. S, News. Winter.
Murawski, W. W. (2003). Co-teaching in the inclusive classroom: Working together to help all
your students find success. Medina, WA: Institute for Educational Development.
Murawski, W. W. (2009). Collaborative teaching in secondary schools: Making the co-teaching
marriage work! Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2001a, 2001b). Leadership matters.
Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/LeadershipMatters.pdf
National Center of Education Statistics. (2016). Students with disabilities. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=64
National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII). Retrieved from
http://www.intensiveintervention.org
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 111
National Council on Disability. (2000). National disability policy: A progress report.
Washington, DC: Author.
The National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities (NICHCY) (2010). Retrieved
from http://nichcy.org/
Nichols, S. C., & Sheffield, A. N. (2014). Is there an elephant in the room? Considerations that
administrators tend to forget when facilitating inclusive practices among general and
special education teachers. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal,
27(1,2), 31-45.
No Child left Behind Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 107-110 (2001).
Northouse, Peter G. (2007). Leadership – Theory and Practice (4
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making inclusion
work in general education classrooms. Education & Treatment of Children, 35(3), 477–
490. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2012.0020
Patterson, J., Marshall, C., & Bowling, D. (2000). Are principals prepared to manage special
education dilemmas? NASSP Bulletin, 84(613), 9–20.
https://doi.org/10.1177/019263650008461303
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pazey, B., & Cole, H. (2013). The role of special education training in the development of
socially just leaders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 243–271.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X12463934
Philbin, L. P. (1997). Transformational leadership and the secondary school principal.
(Doctoral thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (9808502)
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 112
Praisner, C. L. (2003). Attitudes of elementary school principals toward the inclusion of students
with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 135–145.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290306900201
Pugach, M. C., Blanton, L. P., Correa, V. I., McLeskey, J., & Langley, L. K. (2009). The role of
collaboration in supporting the induction and retention of new special education
teachers. NCIPP (Document Number RS-2). Gainesville, FL: National Center to Inform
Policy and Practice in Special Education Professional Development.
Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. The Elementary School
Journal, 83(4), 427–452. https://doi.org/10.1086/461325
Riehl, C. J. (2000). The principal’s role in creating inclusive schools for diverse students: A
review of normative, empirical, and critical literature on the practice of educational
administration. Review of Educational Research, 70(1), 55–81.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070001055
Rosenholtz, S. J., Bassler, O., & Hoover-Dempsey, K. (1986). Organizational conditions of
teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(2), 91–104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(86)90008-9
Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. M. (1997). Policy design for democracy. Lawrence: University
Press of Kansas.
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93-112, 87 Stat. 394 (1973).
Silins, H. C. (1994). The relationship between transformational and transactional leadership and
school improvement outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(3), 272–
298. https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345940050305
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 113
Simon, M. K. (2011). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success (2011 Ed.).
Seattle, WA: Dissertation Success, LLC.
Tejeda, M. J., Scandura, T. A., & Pillai, R. (2001). The MLQ revisited: Psychometric properties
and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(1), 31–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(01)00063-7
Theoharis, G., & Brooks, J. S., 1970. (2012). What every principal needs to know to create
equitable and excellent schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Theoharis, G., & Causton-Theoharis, J. N. (2008). Oppressors or emancipators: Critical
dispositions for preparing inclusive school leaders. Equity & Excellence in Education,
41(2), 230–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680801973714
Theoharis, G., & Causton-Theoharis, J. (2011). Preparing pre-service teachers for inclusive
classrooms: Revising lesson-planning expectations. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 15(7), 743–761. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903350321
Tracey, J. B., & Hinkin, T. R. (1998). Transformational leadership or effective managerial
practices? Group & Organization Management, 23(3), 220–236.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601198233002
U.S. Department of Education (2010). Free appropriate public education for students with
disabilities: Requirements under section 504 of the Rehabilitation act of 1973. Retrieved
from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/edlite-FAPE504.html
U.S. News and World Report Education (2012-2013). Herbert Hoover High School Overview.
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/california/districts/glendale-
unf/herbert-hoover-high-school-2278/student-body

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 114
Vitello, S. J., & Mithaug, D. E. (1998). Inclusive schooling: National and international
perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Voltz, D. L., & Collins, L. (2010). Preparing special education administrators for inclusion in
diverse, standards-based contexts: Beyond the council for exceptional children and the
interstate school leaders licensure consortium. Teacher Education and Special
Education,33(1), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406409356676
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers. The art and method of qualitative interviewing.
New York, NY: Free Press.
Waldron, N. L., McLeskey, J., & Redd, L. (2011). Setting the Direction: The Role of the
Principal in Developing an Effective, Inclusive School. Journal of Special Education
Leadership, 24(2), 51–60.
Wallace, D. S., Paulson, R. M., Lord, C. G., & Bond, C. F., Jr. (2005). Which behaviors do
attitudes predict? Meta-analyzing the effects of social pressure and perceived difficulty.
Review of General Psychology, 9(3), 214–227. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.9.3.214
Wang, L., Bruce, C., & Hughes, H. (2011). Social theories and their application in information
literacy research and education. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 42(4),
296–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2011.10722242
Ware, L. P. (2002). A moral conversation on disability: Risking the personal in educational
contexts. Hypatia, 17(3), 143–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2002.tb00945.x
Whitaker, K. S. (1996). Exploring causes of principal burnout. Journal of Educational
Administration, 34(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578239610107165
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 115
Whitaker, K. S. (2003). Principal role changes and influence on principal recruitment and
selection: An international perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(1),
37–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310457420
Ysseldyke, J. (2001). Reflections on a research career: Generalizations from 25 years of research
on assessment and instructional decision making. Exceptional Children, 67(3), 295–309.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290106700301
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic
leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00013-2
Zigmond, N., Kloo, A., & Volonino, V. (2009). What, where, and how? Special education in the
climate of full inclusion. Exceptionality, 17(4), 189–204.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09362830903231986

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 116
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol
I would like to ask you some questions about inclusion at your school.
1. How long have you been a principal/site administrator?
2. How long have you been involved with inclusion program?
3. How many students in the inclusive program do you have at your school?
4. How familiar are you with inclusion program support? Would you please
elaborate about your familiarity?
5. How would you describe the inclusion program in your school?
6. What is your belief about inclusion?
7. Based on your experience, what is your opinion of inclusion program?
8. If I were an inclusion student, what would it be like for me at your school?
9. How familiar are you with students with disabilities? Please explain.
10. Do you think your teachers are prepared to teach in inclusive settings?
11. What supports are available at your school for general education teachers who
have students in the inclusive program?
12. What supports are available at the district level for the inclusive program?
13. What do you think is needed to support inclusion at your school?
14. What do you think is needed to support students in the inclusive program?
15. What practices supports inclusion at your school?
16. What is the most important practices you would attribute to successful inclusive
practices at your school?
17. How was your school mission statement created?
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 117
18. How do you get your staff to accomplish tasks?
19. What is your approach to working with your staff?
20. What are three of the most significant challenges you have encountered with the
inclusion programs?
21. Is there anything else you would like to add?
Thank you very much for your participation.

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 118
Transformational Leadership Survey Protocol
Scale: 1 = rarely 2 = sometimes 3 = often 4 = almost always
1. I go out of the way to make my staff feel good to be around me. 1 2 3 4
2. I help others with their self-development. 1 2 3 4
3. I help others to understand my visions through the use of tools, such as images, stories, and
models. 1 2 3 4
4. I ensure others get recognition and/or rewards when they achieve difficult or complex goals.
1 2 3 4
5. I let others work in the manner that they want. 1 2 3 4
6. I get things done. 1 2 3 4
7. I have an ever-expanding network of people who trust and rely upon me. 1 2 3 4
8. I provide challenges for my team members to help them grow. 1 2 3 4
9. I use simple words, images, and symbols to convey to others what we should or could be
doing. 1 2 3 4
10. I manage others by setting standards that we all agree with. 1 2 3 4
11. I rarely give direction or guidance to others if I sense they can achieve their goal. 1 2 3 4
12. I consistently provide coaching and feedback so that my team members know how they are
doing. 1 2 3 4
13. People listen to my ideas and concerns not out of fear, but because of my skills, knowledge,
and personality. 1 2 3 4
14. I provide an empathic shoulder when others need help. 1 2 3 4
15. I help others with new ways of looking at new and complex ideas or concepts. 1 2 3 4
16. I ensure poor performance is corrected. 1 2 3 4
17. As long as things are going smoothly, I am satisfied. 1 2 3 4
18. I monitor all projects that I am in charge of to ensure the team meets its goal. 1 2 3 4

Scoring
This survey measures your leadership skills on six practices, Charisma, Social, Vision,
Transactional, Delegation, and Execution. Each factor is measured by three questions as shown
below. Your score is determined by adding your three scores together for each factor in the chart
below. Note that the lowest score you can get for each factor is 3, while the highest score is 12.
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 119

Strength and Weakness Chart for Transformational Leadership Practices

Charisma (questions 1, 7, 13) Total______
Social (questions 2, 8, 14) Total______
Vision (questions 3, 9, 15) Total______
Transactional (questions 4, 10, 16) Total______
Delegation (questions 5, 11, 17) Total______
Execution (questions 6, 12, 18) Total______
Total the scores and enter the number here ______. The highest score possible is 72, while the
lowest possible score is 18.
(donclark@nwlink.com)

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 120
Observation Protocol
Observation Records
Location Date/Time
Observer
Classroom description
Description of room set-up
Materials
Participants

Classroom Diagram

Time Notes Comments
9:00 Observations:
Reflections:

Summary:

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 121
APPENDIX B
Informed Consent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

Key S tak e h ol d e r s ’ Role in Implementing Special Education Inclusion: Leadership and
School Culture

As part of a research study, this document represents the establishment of an initial
understanding of the rights and obligations of a research study participant. You are invited to
participate in a research study conducted by Aida Babayan, a doctoral candidate in the Rossier
School of Education and Dr. Patricia Tobey, Clinical Associate Professor of Education at the
University of Southern California, because you are working as an administrator or a leader for
inclusion of students with disabilities. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the
information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding
whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. If you
decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the present research study is to better understand how the leadership team is
developing a culture change that supports inclusion programs at a suburban high school. This
study intends to collect data on the administrators and key stakeholders’ perspective,
experiences, challenges and needs in inclusion of students with disabilities. This research study
may help other suburban high school principals and leadership teams support and develop
inclusive school culture and improve upon the inclusion programs.

STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to participate an in person
interview of approximately 30 minutes answering interview questions that will be provided to
you for your review prior to the interview. The interview will be conducted at a mutually agreed
time and location convenient for you and the interviewee. You may agree to the recording of the
interview session or request for the interviewee to handwrite the notes, if you do not wish to be
audio recorded. You will have full access to the recording or the interview transcripts if you
wish to review the transcription for accuracy. The response from the interview open-ended
questions will be analyzed to collect data on the administrators and key stakeholders’
perspectives, experiences, challenges and needs in inclusion of students with disabilities in your
school. Additionally, you will be asked to complete a transformational leadership survey
protocol with 18 questions that will identify your areas of strength as transformational leader.
You may agree or disagree to complete this survey. The third method data collection will be
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 122
observation of 3 monthly staff meetings and a number observations of the school’s daily routine
to gather better understanding of the organization’s framework.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
This research does not foresee any potential risks or discomforts to your involvement in this
study. However, possible discomfort to you may be recalling your experiences in the process of
developing the inclusion of students with disabilities and sharing the information with the
interviewee. To minimize this risk, you may decline to respond to any questions and may stop
the interview or the completion of the survey questions at any time. The researcher will make
sure the interviews are conducted in a private and quiet location to maintain your confidentiality
and comfort. Additionally, pseudonyms will be used to all names and only the researcher will
have access to the information connecting you with the study

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
This study may not have any potential benefits to you of the society, however, you may access
this information to consider the results of this study and the recommendations. This study may
benefit other high school principals and leadership teams to enhance the inclusion programs and
develop an inclusive school cultures in their school. The finding may contribute to literature
used to improve education in high schools, for all students, including the students with
disabilities.

CONFIDENTIALITY
The records for the study will be kept confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we are
required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The members of
the research team, and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

The data will be stored in a locked file cabinet in the researcher’s home and it will be accessible
to only the researcher. The recordings from the interviews will be transcribed by the researcher
and the transcripts will be stored safely in a locked file cabinet. You will sign in agreement and
will have access to your interview transcriptions to review for accuracy. Any identifiable
information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential, except if necessary
to protect your rights or welfare. The original data and recording will be kept for three years
after completion of the study, but thereafter, the records will be destroyed.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or
remedies because of your participation in this research study.

I N V ES T I G A TO R ’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact:

Principal Investigator: Aida Babayan, aidabfard@yahoo.com or
Faculty Advisor, Dr. Patricia Tobey, tobey@usc.edu
LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 123

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

Name of Participant

Signature of Participant Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I believe
that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely consents to
participate.

Aida Babayan
Name of Person Obtaining Consent

Aida Babayan
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date

LEADERSHIP AND SCHOOL CULTURE 124
APPENDIX C
IRB Approval Letter

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative case study investigated the role of transformational leadership theory in school administrators’ leadership practices in creating and maintaining positive school culture and practices supporting the inclusion of students with disabilities at a suburban high school with a long-standing history of inclusion. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990 and its reauthorization of 1997 and 2004 created six essential principles. One of these principles was the provision of the least restrictive environment and the mandate that students with disabilities be educated in general education classes together with students without disabilities. The purpose of this study was to investigate how the key stakeholders facilitated the inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education setting. The participants were the principal, three assistant principals, and the chair of the special education department, all referred to as key stakeholders. Purposive sampling was used to collect data on the key stakeholders’ leadership practices used to expand and support the inclusion of students with disabilities. Data from semi-structured interviews, transformational leadership surveys, and observation were analyzed through coding strategies and filtered by inductive analysis approach. The findings revealed that the key stakeholders identified the institutional support and instructional leadership as two main areas of focus necessary for promoting inclusion. The study intended to provide high school administrators with tools on how to promote a receptive school culture and encourage the inclusion of students with disabilities.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Key stakeholders' role in implementing special education inclusion program in an urban high school: leadership and school culture

PDF

Approaches to encouraging and supporting self-regulated learning in the college classroom

PDF

Sustaining quality leadership at prep academy charter schools: promising practices for leadership development in public schools

PDF

A study of the leadership strategies of urban elementary school principals with effective inclusion programs for autistic students in the general education setting for a majority of the school day

PDF

Use of Kotter’s change model by elementary school principals in the successful implementation of inclusive education programs for students with disabilities in K-6 elementary schools in Southern ...

PDF

Struggles build character: the impact of developmental math and the psychological, social and cultural factors that influence Latino males' persistence in STEM

PDF

Oppression of remedial reading community college students and their academic success rates: student perspectives of the unquantified challenges faced

PDF

Best practices general education teachers implement to foster a positive classroom environment

PDF

Breakthrough: an outperforming model continuation school's leadership, programs, and culture case study

PDF

Examining the impact of peer mentoring on transitioning socio-economically disadvantaged minority middle school students

PDF

Cultivating motivation and persistence for urban, high achieving, low-SES African American students

PDF

The role of the principal in schools that effectively implement restorative practices

PDF

Leveraging the principalship for instructional technology equity and access in two urban elementary schools

PDF

The perception of teachers’ pedagogy of technology integration: a case study of second‐grade teachers

PDF

Examining perspectives of academic autonomy in community college students: a quantitative study

PDF

Creating opportunities for engagement and building community utilizing geek culture in a residential education department

PDF

Strategies to create a culture of inclusion for students with special needs

PDF

An examination on educational management and the fostering of leadership sustainability in Hawaiian Catholic K-12 schools

PDF

Influences on principals' leadership practice

PDF

A thriving culture of belonging: organizational cultural intelligence and racial minority retention

Asset Metadata

Creator Babayan, Aida (author)

Core Title Key stakeholders' role in implementing special education inclusion: leadership and school culture

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 10/23/2018

Defense Date 09/05/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag High School,inclusion,inclusive culture,mainstreaming,OAI-PMH Harvest,Special Education

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Combs, Wayne (committee member), Crispen, Patrick (committee member), Escalante, Michael (committee member)

Creator Email aidababa@usc.edu,aidabfard@yahoo.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-90566

Unique identifier UC11676743

Identifier etd-BabayanAid-6901.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-90566 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BabayanAid-6901.pdf

Dmrecord 90566

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Babayan, Aida

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA