Practice and Challenges of Distributed Leadership at Public Secondary Schools of Dessie City Administration

Mesfin Manaze


The objective of this study was to describethe extent to which leadership is distributed in Public Secondary Schools of Dessie City administration and to investigate perception differencesbetween teachers and principals on the extent of the leadership distribution.Quantitative methodology was employed and data was collected from102 teachers and 20 principals working in six public secondary schools at the city administration using a questionnaire that has seven dimensions of the aspects of leadership which was prepared for the purpose of the study based on literatures and other questionnaires used in previous studies. While principals were selected based on their availability, teachers were selected using simple random sampling. Descriptive statistics like Percentage and weighted mean were employed to analyze the collected data after it was inserted to SPSS version 20. Based on the analysis of the data, it was found that leadership is distributed moderately in the selected public secondary schools. Moreover, there were some observed perception differences between teachers and principals on the extent of leadership distribution. While principals tend to be positive on every dimensions of leadership distribution, teachers on the other hand were observed to be less positive. It was also found out thatlack of commitment to participate in leadership activities and the inability to demonstrate responsibility on the teachers’ side were found to be the main challenges to distribute leadership. On the other hand failure to empower, initiate and encourage teachers to make significant contribution, failure to show high professional standards for teachers and not involving the teachers in decision making or initiating ideas from the top despite the meaningful contribution of ideas by teachers from the principals was observed to be main challenges to distribute leadership.It is recommended that initiating and involving teachers in leadership roles from the principals’ side have to be strengthened to cultivate the best out of the teachers and to improve the performance of their school. On the other hand willingness and cooperation from the teachers sideis recommended as it will pave the way for their future professional development and enjoy their extra role beyond teaching in addition to their contribution for their school success.


leadership, Distributed Leadership, Teachers, principals

Full Text:



• Alma H. (2013). Reflections on distributed leadership, Journal of MiE, 19(2), 10-12.

• Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P.A. & Harvey, J.A. (2003). Distributed Leadership: A Review of Literature. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.

• Day, C., P. Sammons, D. Hopkins, A. Harris, K. Leithwood, Qing Gu, E. Brown, E. Ahtaridou, Kington (2009). The impact of school leadership on pupils’ outcomes. Final report. University of Nottingham.

• Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. The Albert Shanker Institute.

• Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed properties. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 28(4), 317–338

• Harris, A. (2002), Distributed Leadership in Schools: Lead or Misleading. Retrieved from

• Harris, A. (2004). Distributed leadership: leading or misleading. Educational Management and Administration, 32(1), 11 -24.

• Harris, A. (2007). Distributed leadership: conceptual confusion and empirical reticence. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(3), 1–11.

• Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: according to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 46, 172–188.

• Harris, A (2009) Distributed Leadership. Retrieved from

• Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Rosseel, Y. (2009). Development and validation of scores on the Distributed leadership inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, XX, 1-22.

• Jones, S., & Novak, B. (2009c). Student feedback and leadership. Resource portfolio. Strawberry Hills: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved from leadership-assessment- rmit-2009

• Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007). Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 37–67.

• Leithwood, K., Mascall, B. & Strauss, T. (2009a). Distributed Leadership according to the evidence. Abingdon: Routledge

• Marshall, S. (2006). Issues in the development of leadership for learning and teaching in higher education. Sydney: ALTC Exchange. Retrieved February 12, 2008 from resource-issues-development-leadership-learning-macquarie.

• Mitiku, H. (2014). Principals’ distributed leadership practice in secondary schools of South west shoa Zone. Unpublished MA thesis, AAU.

• MOE. (2015). Education sector development program V (ESDP V).Addis Ababa.

• OECD (2009). Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments First results From TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey), OECD Publishing.

• Sandra J. et al. (2012). Distributed leadership: a collaborative framework for academics, executives and professionals in higher education, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34:1, 67-78.

• Spillane, J. (2004) Distributed Leadership: What’s all the Hoopla? Working paper, Northwestern University, Institute for Policy Research.

• Spillane, J. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.