Introduction
Transformational and strategic leadership are contemporary theories, which create a positive school culture, enhance student learning and achievement, and promote profound educational transformation. Unlike the conventional models, these strategies are educationally appropriate and espouse values and concepts, which are fundamental in a school setting. Observing the ideal staffing ratios for both academic and support employees is a fundamental consideration with direct impacts on the functionality of the learning institutions.
Additionally, school budgeting is an integral component of financial leadership which fosters fiscal discipline and supports the accomplishment of the predetermined objectives in the most cost-effective manner. Although transformational leadership primarily focuses on building a collaborative approach in decision-making processes, the strategic theory emphasizes long-range planning and persuades colleagues to acquire and actualize the vision.
Current Literature on Transformational and Strategic Leadership Styles in Higher Education
Transformational and strategic leadership styles have immensely contributed to the evolution and reformation of higher education worldwide. Studies indicate that the former model is significantly effective in empowering, inspiring, and motivating school teams in their respective undertakings (Iriqat, 2018). According to Nurtjahjani et al. (2019), this theory enhances employee performance, learning outcomes among students, the development of productive relationships, and creating a culture of innovation and improvement. This view is corroborated by Vu et al. (2020), who argue that transformational leadership fosters academic research in tertiary education.
Similarly, the application of the strategic stewardship model promotes the continuous improvement of an institution through the enhanced focus on the schools’ vision and objectives. Rather than the prominent emphasis on the institutions’ day-to-day processes, this concept responds to the emerging issues through evidence, research, and the most suitable approach to achieve the set objectives. In this regard, these two leadership approaches are outstandingly educationally appropriate and support continuous progress, innovation, empowerment, and growth, which ultimately promote the academic achievement of students.
Transformational and Strategic Leadership in Higher Education
Leadership plays an integral role in the successful management of institutions of higher learning and the promotion of positive student outcomes. Although educational stewardship is a distinct management field, transformational and strategic theories provide academically suitable concepts which reinvigorate the connection between purpose and administration. The application of educationally inappropriate models risks placing a higher emphasis on procedures and governance at the expense of the primary purpose of learning and values (Duire & Beshir, 2016).
Notably, today’s volatile financial environment, increasing accountability pressures, changing demographics, the need for innovative education models, and the growth of international partnerships make transformational and strategic leadership the ideal administrative approaches in higher education. However, the two theories share various distinct differences and similarities.
Transformational leadership adopts a collaborative style in decision-making where leaders inspire and empower their school teams to participate in decision-making and facilitate a collective goal-setting. These leaders establish a culture of innovation, continuous improvement, and a shared sense of purpose, effectively creating the stage for success and growth (Al-Mansoori & Koc, 2019). Conversely, the strategic model is anchored on long-range planning through the development of future-oriented objectives.
Administrators who apply this theory analyze, evaluate, monitor, and assess the current status of their educational institutions and prepare a range of objectives in conjunction with the school’s partners. From this perspective, the two models accentuate the indispensability of collective thinking, shared decision-making, and collaborative efforts toward accomplishing the set goals. Additionally, transformational and strategic leadership approaches significantly stimulate innovation, sustainable development, and capacity building in tertiary educational institutions due to the increased ownership of the processes and job satisfaction.
However, strategic leaders place a greater premium on the future orientation of the institutions, while transformational stewards focus significantly on establishing and facilitating organizational collaboration to drive the shared vision forward. On the one hand, the latter espouses inspirational motivation, idealized influence, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation to inspire morale and performance. On the other hand, strategic leaders set the institution’s direction by enhancing the clarity of the vision, creating frameworks, allocating resources, and establishing interventions for the realization of the desired reforms.
Staffing Ratios and Effective Class Sizes Based on Funding
Class size and staffing ratios are among the prominent factors which directly influence students’ learning. Units with a smaller student population contribute to better learning conditions, an improved working environment for teachers, and a better focus on the specific needs of individual learners than those with higher pupils, especially in PK-12. However, the prevailing financial circumstances have compelled educators to conceptualize alternative models of pupil-teacher ratio, particularly in tertiary education where student-tutor proportion is considerably immaterial (Bowne et al., 2017).
For instance, Solheim and Opheim (2019) argue that minimum and maximum populations in any given class in higher education are not supported by decisive and conclusive evidence. Consequently, the notion of recommended standards for staffing in schools has been significantly attenuated by innovative approaches which maximize the opportunities provided by classes of varying sizes. Filges et al. (2018) contend that the considerably low effect of student achievement in small class populations does not justify the resultant cost implications for adjusting class sizes.
Little research has been conducted to explore the relationship between class size and pupils’ academic achievement in tertiary institutions. Although the reduction of unit populations is a highly popular policy proposal, the associated costs of implementing such a strategy outweigh the realizable benefits. In this regard, institutions of higher learning would rather invest the finances in alternative projects and reforms which would provide better value than additional teachers. Similarly, the academic performance of learners is unlikely to be affected by the number of support staff deployed in a particular institution.
Support employees are not expected to provide individualized services to learners, implying that their aggregate numbers do not impact the students’ academic performance and outcomes. Innovative classroom approaches, such as focused classroom management and control, and co-teaching, provide effective alternatives to class-size reduction (Solheim & Opheim, 2019). However, a generally accepted principle for engaging workers is that they should effectively execute their mandate and support the schools’ proper functioning. Therefore, in the light of funding constraints in education, there are no industry’s recommended staffing standards or minimum and maximum workforce for teachers and support staff in higher educational institutions.
Importance of School Budgeting
School budgets are critical financial management tools, which ensure that the institution’s administration effectively manages the available resources to achieve the desired objectives. They provide valuable insights regarding the most productive approaches for allocating and utilizing finances (Alahmadi & Tabrizi, 2019; Maisaroh et al., 2019). Additionally, school budgets allow institutions to exert greater control over their monetary affairs, plan ahead of any anticipated eventualities, and make better decisions for the overall benefit of the institution, students, teachers, and other stakeholders. Through this process, educational establishments experience increased independence, authority, and flexibility in executing their programs.
Implementing discipline in budgeting for schools is fundamental in guaranteeing the financial stability of the institutions. Among the main ways through which direction and authority in financial planning can be achieved is through the involvement of all parties and stakeholders. Additionally, the budgeting process should be guided by the available data and evidence from the previous financial years and integrate incremental expenditures and incomes based on the historical statistics. This ensures that the projection is realistic, workable, and pragmatic and eliminates the possibility of overstating or underestimating any of the components. Moreover, the anticipated expenses should be as close to the expected revenues as possible to prevent the likelihood of the school falling into financial distress in the future. This would entail the comprehensive integration and consideration of all the institution’s monetary constituents, including the outflows and inflows.
Sources of Revenues for Schools and the Key Factors Affecting Expenses
Schools generally obtain their revenues through the fees paid by students, government contributions, stakeholders’ grants, donations, and incomes from various activities, including farming and investment. There are various factors that impact the expenses inside an academic institution. These include the size of the workforce, student population, ongoing or proposed capital projects, and miscellaneous activities, such as maintenance and diet. Additionally, schools can generate revenue through engagements such as sponsorships, fundraising initiatives, organized events, clubs, and the letting of facilities such as school buses or playgrounds.
Conclusion
Conclusively, transformational and strategic leadership styles are educationally appropriate models for higher education. Although the two models are distinctively different, they share various similarities which contribute to the proper governance of academic institutions and promote positive student outcomes. Although the teacher-student ratio is a major consideration in the formative school years, the effect of class sizes in tertiary education is insignificant. Additionally, the support personnel’s population has no impact on students’ performance. Moreover, school budgeting is a critical financial management tool that enables institutions to exercise effective control and the management of their financial affairs.
References
Alahmadi, H., & Tabrizi, S. (2019). School budgeting planning: Selecting the most effective budget plan for Ontario’s public schools. International Journal of Innovative Business Strategies, 5(1), 279–284. Web.
Al-Mansoori, R. S., & Koc, M. (2019). Transformational leadership, systems, and intrinsic motivation impacts on innovation in higher education institutes: Faculty perspectives in engineering colleges. Sustainability, 11(15), 1–26. Web.
Bowne, J., Magnuson, K., Schindler, H., Duncan, G., & Yoshikawa, H. (2017). A meta-analysis of class sizes and ratios in early childhood education programs: Are thresholds of quality associated with greater impacts on cognitive, achievement, and socioemotional outcomes? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(3), 407–428. Web.
Duire, A. D., & Beshir, E. S. (2016). Leadership effectiveness in higher education institutions: The IPA Approach. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 6(5), 1–4. Web.
Filges, T., Sonne‐Schmidt, C. & Nielsen, B. (2018). Small class sizes for improving student achievement in primary and secondary schools: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 14(1), 1–107. Web.
Iriqat, I. S. (2018). The effectiveness of applying transformational leadership within the roles of administrative leaders in Palestine universities/comparative approach. European Journal of Scientific Research, 151(1), 34–47. Web.
Maisaroh, S., Slamet, PH., & Hadi, S. (2019. The budget planning determinant factors at state primary schools in Yogyakarta Province. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 353–368. Web.
Nurtjahjani, F., Noermijati, N., Hadiwidojo, D., & Irawanto, D. W. (2019). Transformational leadership in higher education: (A study in Indonesian universities). Advances in Economics, Business, and Management Research, 135, 95–101. Web.
Solheim, O., & Opheim, V. (2019). Beyond class size reduction: Towards more flexible ways of implementing a reduced pupil–teacher ratio. International Journal of Educational Research, 96, 146–153. Web.
Vu, T., Vu, M., & Hoang, V. (2020). The impact of transformational leadership on promoting academic research in the higher educational system in Vietnam. Management Science Letters, 10(3), 585–592. Web.