Stimulating the Influence of Teaching Effectiveness and Students’ Learning Motivation by Using the Hierarchical Linear Model

Abstract

In the context of school learning and teaching, teachers are leaders who stimulate students’ learning outcomes through leadership styles. The teacher efficacy of this study is discussed by using multiple teaching and class management strategies. Because the situation of each school is different, the contingency theory is used to design the research structure. This study changed the original leadership style to the new leadership style; effectiveness to teacher effectiveness; and context to school context, and set them as moderators. Since the unit of analysis is teachers, it is difficult to find factors such as differences in regression coefficients in the school context. Therefore, the HLM hierarchical linear analysis is used, and the school context is set as the second level, and then statistical analysis is performed. Teachers’ leadership styles have significant differences in multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness. Moral leadership and charismatic leadership have a moderating effect on the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness. The multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness have a significant effect in middle school situations with lower moral leadership. On the other hand, charismatic leadership is more pronounced in middle school situations than in high school situations. Teachers’ leadership styles have a significant impact on classroom management of teacher effectiveness. Under the situational control of schools, moral leadership, charismatic leadership, and supportive leadership have moderating effects on classroom management of teacher effectiveness. When the classroom management of teacher effectiveness is in the middle school situation, low moral leadership is more significant; in the high school situation, charismatic leadership will reduce the effectiveness of the class management; in the moderate or high situation, the higher the support of the leader, the greater the effect of class management.

1. Introduction

The influence of a situation can make a leader more effective and also enable members to realize their potential [1]. Therefore, leaders can use the influence of the situation to improve their effectiveness. On the contrary, if they are unable to adapt to the situation, then their leadership effectiveness may be limited [2]. It can be seen that not all situations or highly good situations can positively impact leadership effectiveness. When a leader can grasp the situation, he can use the influence of the situation to improve his effectiveness, but even in a good situation, a failure to adapt to this situation may reduce the effectiveness of leadership [3].

The cultures and local conditions of each school are not the same, making the management of each school more or less different. Because teachers do not have a specific leadership style to lead students without any disadvantage, we should discuss the leadership styles of teachers with regard to their effectiveness. When it comes to effectiveness, it is necessary to consider the effects of the interaction of contexts. If the leader’s leadership style is measured separately, then it is also necessary to consider the relationship between leadership style and situation type to predict leadership effectiveness [4]. Therefore, this study employs this theory to explore the impacts of school situation and teacher leadership styles on teacher effectiveness.

The student structure can be divided into two types: daytime and nighttime. The majority of daytime students are fresh junior high school graduates who are mentally similar in age. The nighttime department mainly promotes advanced studies. Although students in the daytime department have the same qualifications after graduation, they also have the qualifications to apply to a university of science and technology. The structure of students in the nighttime department is not the same in each class, and so their quality is not only different in academic performances, but also in potential factors such as age and mentality. Therefore, this research explores the effectiveness of teachers through the contingency theory and also the differences between teachers’ teaching in the daytime and nighttime departments as control variables.

Research Purposes

Each school’s learning style is different. The main reason is that some schools advocate the individual development of students, but some school principals or directors strongly lead their school’s teaching policies. These factors can affect the flexibility of teachers in the classroom. Therefore, this study refers to the situational variables in the contingency theory, which evaluates and sums up the relationships between leaders and subordinates, work structure, and powers and then analyzes the level of the school situation. The research objects are mainly daytime and nighttime teachers in vocational high schools. Therefore, this study adds a control variable for these two period’s departments to explore the influence of vocational high school teachers’ leadership styles on their teacher effectiveness under different school situations.

There are so many types of leadership styles that it is impossible to count their total number one by one. This research refers to Fieder’s contingency leadership theory. The leadership style variables in his theory are divided into two aspects: relationship orientation and work orientation. In order to meet the purpose of this research, the leadership style variables are modified into leadership styles. The two dimensions of relationship-oriented and work-oriented are removed, modified, and replaced to become moral leadership, charismatic leadership, supportive leadership, and responsibility-oriented leadership. Therefore, these four leadership styles are the scope of this research in terms of leadership styles.

The factors affecting a situation cover a wide range, and it is difficult to analyze and evaluate them one by one. Therefore, this research refers to the contingent leadership theory and takes the relationship between leaders and subordinates, work structure, and powers as its scope to evaluate teachers in the school situation so as to understand whether their leadership style affects the regulating influence in terms of their effectiveness under different school situations.

Teacher effectiveness refers to that shown by teachers in the classroom. However, in order to meet the purpose herein, this research takes it as general teaching effectiveness. Therefore, “multiple teaching strategies” and “class management” are used as the research scope of teaching effectiveness [5].

2. Literature Discussion

Fiedler’s contingency leadership theory states that in different situations, there will be a specific leadership style that is most effective. The changes in leadership styles can be divided into two types: ‘relation-oriented’ for maintaining good relationships with members of the organization and ‘task-oriented’ for achieving job goals. However, both types of leaders have these two needs, but there must be one type that is more prominent. Thus, there is a need to determine whether a leader has a ‘relation-oriented’ or ‘task oriented’ leadership style.

Federer’s contingency leadership theory emphasizes the importance of context to leadership effectiveness. Therefore, although there are many situational factors that influence leadership effectiveness from the standpoint of the leader, the situational variables of Federer’s contingency theory are leader–member relations, task structure, and authority. There are three types of position power, and eight situational styles are constructed to evaluate and judge the situational control and situational favorableness.

2.1. Leadership Style

The measurement of leadership style requires the use of the ‘least preferred co-worker’ or LPC scale for short. Federer stated that in a situation of an unfavorable leader, the leader does not have to sacrifice anything to complete the task. It is possible to sacrifice a good relationship with the members of the organization, and there is no way to have [6].

Federer’s contingency theory is divided into two types of leadership styles: relationship-motivated and task-motivated. ‘Relationship orientation’ has a higher score on the LPC scale, which refers to leaders who are better at interacting with others, can maintain good relationships with members of the organization, and have a better performance under moderate contextual control; comparatively, ‘task orientation’ has a low score on the LPC scale. Leaders require work goals to be the first objective, and they are not good at cultivating interpersonal relationships with organization members. If they are not under high contextual control, then they must have relatively low contextual control to have a good performance.

2.2. Situation

The relationship between leaders and subordinates is the first aspect of situational variables. It has been found that the relationship between leaders and subordinates is one of the most important factors in group decision-making [7]. It has also been pointed out that when leaders believe that subordinates can support them, it also means that the members affirm the decisions made by the leaders on the job.

Task structure (TS) is the second aspect of contextual variables, which means the degree to which one can master the methods and goals of work [8]. When a leader is able to fully grasp the progress of the work, etc., he will have greater control over the work content and goals. At the level of work structure, Federer used four indicators: goal clarity, goal-path multiplicity, solution specificity, and decision verifiability [9].

Position power is the third aspect of situational control. It is the power that the organization gives to the leader, which is mainly to enable the leader to facilitate the execution of the work content. The size of the authority of a leader is largely related to the management level and the nature of the job. In terms of position, power is the control ability granted by the leader. Sometimes, in order to achieve certain goals, various methods are used, among which rewards or punishments are common methods. Therefore, Federer divides the power indicators into three aspects: the official title of the leader, the power of the leader to recommend and implement rewards and punishments, and the material gap between the leader and the subordinate. Based on the above indicators, he developed a ‘power scale’ (Positional Power Scale; PP).

2.3. Teacher Effectiveness

Teacher effectiveness refers to a teacher’s personal teaching ability and external factors that affect student learning effectiveness [10]. It means that students are not only influenced by their teacher’s teaching, but that their teacher’s internal self-belief will also be quietly affected by the physical and mental development of the students. Thus, teacher effectiveness has a significant impact on students’ learning effectiveness and physical and mental development [11].

2.4. Leadership

A transformational leader is a kind of leadership model that needs to change the thoughts and attitudes of the members of an organization, recognize the goals of the organization, and then enhance the motivation of the members of the organization to achieve the best organizational work efficiency [12]. Many foreign scholars have also confirmed that conversion leadership has a positive correlation with effectiveness. For example, research showed a positive correlation between transformational leadership and employee performance [13]. Using the path goal theory helps find that transformational leadership has good predictive power for employee performance [14]. We can see that there is a positive correlation between conversion leadership and performance.

Transactional leadership was first proposed by Burns. Transactional leadership maintains the relationship between organization members due to an exchange of value or mutual benefit [15]. In other words, it constantly exchanges or has a value-based relationship between leaders and members of the organization [16].

Paying attention to members of the organization makes them feel at ease and they will then be willing to share their strength with a leader. It can be seen that the charismatic leadership style and supportive leadership style are consistent with transformational leadership. The strongest charismatic leader in an organization member leadership rating is related to extroversion, but the strongest supporting leader has a better affinity. Therefore, this study subdivides the transformation of leadership style into charismatic leadership and supportive leadership.

Transactional leadership is more based on economic exchange. Leaders take fairness as the starting point and set goals and rewards to entice members of the organization to improve efficiency. For authority-based leadership, on the other hand, task-oriented leadership is more conscious [17]. Leaders set work goals that must be completed and maintain group standards and deadlines. They are good at organizing group activities. Therefore, this study subdivides transactional leadership into moral leadership and task-oriented leadership [18].

This research uses HLM class linear analysis and puts the variables of the school situation in the second level. However, another problem is the heterogeneity of regression. Since teachers are the unit of analysis, it is not easy to detect differences in regression coefficients among schools. On the other hand, when the teacher’s class is merged into the school class for discussion, it will cause aggregation bias, and doing so may ignore the differences among teachers in each school that would reduce the explanatory power of statistics [19].

The research structure spans two analytical levels (school level and teacher level). Therefore, the research design also adopts hierarchical linear analysis [20]. Hence, this research adopts the hierarchical linear model (HLM) as the analysis method and puts the adjustment variables of the school situation in the second tier of the school level.

3. Research Design and Implementation

3.1. Leadership Style

Leadership styles into four types: moral leadership, charismatic leadership, supportive leadership, and task-oriented leadership. Therefore, this study changes the leadership style of contingency theory to the above four types of leadership [21,22].

3.2. School Situation

Federer stated that context should be used as the starting point for measuring effectiveness. In this case, due to different contexts, the effectiveness standards should also be different. Schools are a service, and their effectiveness is more likely to be reflected in job satisfaction and morale [23]. From this, it can be seen that effectiveness can be determined by context. This study aims to explore the relationship between vocational high school teachers’ leadership styles and teacher effectiveness in different situations. Therefore, the effectiveness variable in this study is changed to teacher effectiveness. In order to conform to this research, a teacher’s effectiveness is divided into ‘multiple teaching strategies’ and ‘class management’ through literature research.

3.3. Research Object

The main purpose of this research is to explore the relationship between leadership style and the effectiveness of vocational high school teachers in the daytime and nighttime departments under the influence of the school situation. This research includes public and private industrial high schools, agricultural industrial high schools, commercial vocational high schools, and vocational high schools, as the research mother group, and so the research object is all teachers who work in the daytime and nighttime departments at vocational high schools. In order to bring the data closer to the facts, we adopt stratified proportional sampling to divide Taiwan into four regions: northern, central, southern, and eastern. The stratified proportional sampling is carried out according to the number of vocational high schools to improve sample representativeness.

The statistical method of this study adopts HLM. Because the research structure of this study is divided into two levels, the first level is for teachers, and the second one is for schools [24]. in the linear analysis of levels, the sample number of the highest level should be at least 30 to meet the minimum requirements of HLM. The sample number of the second school level is at least 30. Therefore, this research requires at least 30 vocational high schools, and there must be at least 30 teachers at each school, which means at least 900 teachers make up the research sample to meet the HLM statistical threshold requirements. After that, the study distributed 1085 questionnaires in total, which are composed of 35 copies each at 31 vocational high schools. Finally, we collected a total of 30 school questionnaires. After excluding invalid questionnaires, 920 questionnaires were compiled, achieving a questionnaire response rate of 84.7%.

3.4. Research Hypothesis

Supporting leadership refers to the characteristics of being friendly, close, and caring for members of the organization. There is a relationship of mutual trust and respect between the leader and the members of the organization [25]. The leader cares about the lives of the members of the organization through mutual trust. To increase the work efficiency of the members of the organization [26], their leadership styles will affect the design of teachers’ teaching strategies.

Hypothesis 1a:

There is a positive correlation between multiple teaching strategies supporting leadership and teacher effectiveness.

Hypothesis 1b:

There is a positive impact between class management supporting leadership and teacher effectiveness.

Teachers’ supportive leadership style is affected by environmental factors in the teaching strategies and class management of teacher effectiveness [27].

Hypothesis 5a:

Compared with lower school situations, vocational high school teachers support multiple teaching strategies in that leadership positively impacts their effectiveness in high school situations.

Hypothesis 5b:

Compared with lower school situations, vocational high school teachers support class management in that leadership positively impacts their effectiveness in high school situations.

Many foreign scholars have studied the effectiveness of charismatic leadership. For example, Shamir, House, and Arthur (1993) examined the influence of charismatic leaders on their subordinates through motivational theory and found that charismatic leaders can be evoked by their vision [28].

Motivation and needs of members enable members to improve their performance behavior [29].

Hypothesis 2a:

Charismatic leadership positively correlates with multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness.

Hypothesis 2b:

Charismatic leadership positively correlates with class management of teacher effectiveness.

School situations have an impact on a teacher’s charismatic leadership style and teacher effectiveness [30]. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed.

Hypothesis 6a:

Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ charismatic leadership positively influences multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.

Hypothesis 6b:

Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ charismatic leadership positively affects the class management of a teacher’s effectiveness in high school situations.

Using the principles of ethical leadership on campus to plan something and implement it carefully can further enhance the school’s effectiveness and cause a positive impact on class management [31]. This study concludes that moral leadership has a positive effect on teacher effectiveness, and so the hypothesis goes as follows.

Hypothesis 3a:

There is a positive correlation between ethical leadership and multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness.

Hypothesis 3b:

There is a positive correlation between ethical leadership and class management of teacher effectiveness.

When teachers have a moral leadership style, they have a positive impact on the effectiveness of multiple teaching strategies and class management. However, the two may be affected by context and other related factors [32].

Hypothesis 7a:

Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ moral leadership positively affects the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.

Hypothesis 7b:

Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ moral leadership positively affects the class management of the teacher’s effectiveness in high school situations.

Task-oriented leadership can condense the centripetal force of organization members and the mode of strategies used. It thus impacts the effectiveness of the organization team [33].

Hypothesis 4a:

Task-oriented leadership positively correlates with multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness.

Hypothesis 4b:

Task-oriented leadership positively correlates with class management of teacher effectiveness.

Task-oriented leadership, therefore, has an influential relationship between the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness and class management. However, the situation will have an impact on both of them [34].

Hypothesis 8a:

Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ task-oriented leadership positively affects the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.

Hypothesis 8b:

Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ task-oriented leadership positively affects the class management of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.

This study uses HLM as the statistical method. In order to match up with HLM, this research puts leadership style and teacher effectiveness as the first level and the situational variables as the second level and then adds the control variables for daytime and nighttime departments. The research’s hypothetical architecture diagram is shown in Figure 1.

3.5. Research Tool

This work explores leadership styles—focusing on ethical leadership, charismatic leadership, supportive leadership, and task-oriented leadership—and explores and analyzes the inquiry through literature [35]. Therefore, the ‘relationship-oriented’ dimension is subdivided into ‘charismatic leadership’ and ‘supportive leadership’, and the ‘work-oriented dimension’ is divided into ‘moral leadership’ and ‘task-based leadership’. Referenced are searched and discussed based on the four leadership styles and translated with the original meanings kept. Then, they are modified according to the research purpose and they complete the five-point leadership style scale.

The situational variables in Fiedle’s contingency theory are based on the five-point Leader–Subordinate Relationship Scale (LMR), the three-point Work Structure Scale (TS), and the three-point Authority Scale (PP). The scales are combined and analyzed to calculate the situations of high, medium, and low controls [36]. Therefore, regarding the measurement of contextual variables, this study mainly refers to the three scales of the Fiedler Contingency Theory to measure the situation: Leader and Subordinate Relationship Scale (LMR), Work Structure Scale (TS), and Power Scale (PP). According to the purpose of this research, translation and semantic modification are carried out to complete the context scale.

Questions about the preparation of the Leader–Subordinate Relationship Scale (LMR), the Work Structure Scale (TS), and the Authority Scale (PP) are in the situational scale of this study.

Based on the scales of Woolfolk Hoy [37]. Cronbach’s values in this study are all greater than 0.7. Therefore, they have a relatively high reliability, as shown in Ta Tschannen-Moran, and Woolfolk Hoy, this research divides teacher effectiveness into two dimensions according to its study purpose: “multiple teaching strategies” and “class management” [38,39].

Snijders and Bosker indicated in class linear analysis that the number of samples in the highest class must be at least. Therefore, in order to meet the minimum sample requirements of HLM, 900 teachers in total at 30 vocational high schools are required. In this study, questionnaires were collected from 30 schools, and after excluding invalid questionnaires and incomplete ones, we acquired a total of 920 valid questionnaires.

The basic background information of valid samples was analyzed by statistical methods such as frequency distribution (N) and percentage (%). Among the 920 formal samples, there is a total of 813 teachers in the daytime department, accounting for 88.4% of the effective sample, while the number of teachers in the nighttime department is 107, accounting for 11.6% of the effective sample. There are 643 male teachers, accounting for 69.9% of the effective sample, and there are 277 female teachers, accounting for 30.1% of the effective sample. From the above analyses, the sample survey results of this study found that the respondents lean heavily more on male teachers. Among the 30 schools sampled in this study, 21 industrial senior high schools accounted for 70%, 3 commercial high schools accounted for 10%, and 6 commercial and industrial high schools accounted for 20%. There are 28 public schools and 2 private schools. In total, questionnaires from 30 schools were collected in this study, composed of 6 in the north accounting for 20%, 12 in the central region accounting for 40%, and 12 in the southern region accounting for 40%.

Reliability is verified using Cronbach’s value [40]. It has been pointed out that the generally acceptable value of Cronbach’s value is between 0.6 and 0.7. The Cronbach’s values in this study are all greater than 0.7. Therefore, they have a relatively high reliability, as shown in

Table 1. Reliability analysis.

Potential Variables	Dimension	Numbers	Cronbach’s α
Leadership style	Moral leadership	7	0.846
	Charismatic leadership	8	0.883
	Supportive leadership	7	0.833
	Task-oriented leadership	8	0.816
Situation	Leader–member relations (LMR)	8	0.745
	Work structure scale (TS)	10	0.824
	Position power (PP)	5	0.733
Teacher effectiveness	Multiple teaching strategies	3	0.751
	Class management	5	0.846

.

This study uses the principal component method in factor analysis to extract the main factor, and the factors whose characteristic value is greater than 1 are selected. The factor rotation axis method (Varimax) is used to perform the rotation axis of a factor, and the items with a factor loading greater than 0.5 are retained. Before factor analysis, the KMO and Bartlett spherical test analysis data were used to determine whether factor analysis can be performed. Therefore, this study first calculates the KMO value to determine whether the factor analysis is suitable. Kaiser also stated that the larger the KMO value is, the more suitable it is for factor analysis. On the contrary, when the KMO value is less than 0.5, it is not suitable for factor analysis [41].

An analysis of the returned formal questionnaire finds that the KMO values of the four dimensions of the leadership style scale are all greater than 0.8, which is greater than the threshold value of 0.6 recommended by Kaiser, and so it is suitable for factor analysis. The p-value of Bartlett’s sphere test is less than 0.001, reaching the significant standard, and so it is suitable for factor analysis, as shown in

Table 2. KMO and Bartlett’s spherical test analysis

Potential Variables	KMO	Analysis of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity			Cumulative Explanatory Variation (%)
		Chi-Square	Mobility	Significance
Moral leadership	0.851	2501.559	21	0.000	53.208
Charismatic leadership	0.902	3212.224	28	0.000	55.142
Supportive leadership	0.882	1967.609	21	0.000	50.504
Task-oriented leadership	0.888	2819.968	28	0.000	51.895

.

After KMO and Bartlett’s sphere test analysis, factor analysis and aggregate validity analysis are performed. The cumulative explanatory variation of each aspect is greater than 50%, and the load of each factor is at least greater than 0.5. In addition, the CR values of these two dimensions are both higher than 0.8, which meets the standard of greater than 0.6, and the average variance extraction (AVE) is higher than the standard of 0.5. The results are shown in

Table 3. Leadership’s factor and aggregate validity analyses.

Potential Variables	Cumulative Explanatory Variation	Loads of Factors	t-Test	Construct Reliability (CR)	Average Variance Extraction (AVE)
Mortal leadership	1	0.755		0.875	0.5009
	2	0.730	22.209 ***
	3	0.755	21.559 ***
	4	0.723	20.240 ***
	5	0.626	17.529 ***
	6	0.664	17.624 ***
	7	0.632	17.917 ***
Charismatic leadership	1	0.765		0.8907	0.506
	2	0.682	18.254 ***
	3	0.802	20.790 ***
	4	0.756	19.666 ***
	5	0.633	17.070 ***
	6	0.690	18.233 ***
	7	0.662	17.569 ***
	8	0.684	17.905 ***
Supportive leadership	1	0.783		0.8766	0.5049
	2	0.786	21.893 ***
	3	0.704	16.433 ***
	4	0.697	16.668 ***
	5	0.667	15.833 ***
	6	0.673	16.096 ***
	7	0.671	16.080 ***
Task-oriented leadership	1	0.843		0.8892	0.5028
	2	0.669	17.635 ***
	3	0.646	16.761***
	4	0.732	18.458 ***
	5	0.709	17.608 ***
	6	0.747	18.427 ***
	7	0.678	17.617 ***
	8	0.625	16.222 ***

Note: *** p < 0.001.

.

According to the results of the returned formal questionnaire analysis, the KMO values of the three dimensions of the situational scale are all greater than 0.7, which is higher than the threshold value of 0.6 recommended by Kaiser, and so it is suitable for factor analysis. The p-value of Bartlett’s sphere test is less than 0.001, reaching a significant standard, and so it is suitable for factor analysis, as shown in

Table 4. KMO and Bartlett’s spherical test analyses

Potential Variables	KMO	Analysis of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity			Cumulative Explanatory Variation (%)
		Chi-Square	Mobility	Significance
LMR	0.863	3348.083	28	0.000	64.993
TS	0.862	2464.924	45	0.000	52.208
PP	0.717	1008.433	10	0.000	68.758

.

After the KMO and Bartlett’s sphere test analyses, factor analysis and aggregate validity analysis are performed, and the cumulative explanatory variance of each aspect is greater than 50%. The load of each factor is higher than 0.5. In addition, the CR values of the three potential variables are higher than 0.8, which meets the standard of greater than 0.6, and the average variance extraction (AVE) is also higher than the standard of 0.5. The details are listed in the table.

According to the results of the returned formal questionnaire analysis, the KMO values of the two dimensions of the situational scale are both greater than 0.6, which is higher than the threshold value of 0.6 recommended by Kaiser, and so it is suitable for factor analysis. The p-value of Bartlett’s sphere test is less than 0.001, reaching the significant standard, and so it is suitable for factor analysis, as shown in

Table 5. KMO and teacher effectiveness Bartlett’s spherical test analyses

Potential Variables	KMO	Analysis of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity			Cumulative Explanatory Variation (%)
		Chi-Square	Mobility	Significance
Multi-learning strategies	0.663	753.877	3	0.000	67.973
Class management	0.856	1743.649	10	0.000	62.083

.

After the KMO and Bartlett sphere test analyses, factor analysis and convergent validity analysis are performed, and the cumulative explanatory variation of each aspect is greater than 60%. The load of this factor is higher than 0.5. In addition, the CR values are all higher than 0.8, which meets the standard of greater than 0.6, and the average variance extraction (AVE) is also higher than the standard of 0.5. The results are shown in

Table 6. Factor and aggregate validity analyses

Potential Variables	Observed Variables	Loads of Factors	t-Test	Construct Reliability (CR)	Average Variance Extraction (AVE)
Multiple teaching strategies	1	0.569		0.772	0.5364
	2	0.844	14.549 ***
	3	0.757	15.209 ***
Classroom management	1	0.673		0.8476	0.5273
	2	0.734	19.049 ***
	3	0.753	18.915 ***
	4	0.772	19.459 ***
	5	0.694	17.624 ***

Note: *** p < 0.001.

.

4. HLM Hierarchy Linear Analysis

The analysis process of cross-level research infers that the variables of a teacher’s personal class and the school situation have an impact on the dependent variables, and so the variation of the dependent variables is divided into inter-group variation components (between-group components, σ00) and within group variation components (within-group components, τ00) in order to confirm whether the dependent variables are different due to the influence of the school context hierarchy. This research depends on the variable of teacher effectiveness, which can be divided into two aspects: multiple teaching strategies and class management. The analysis model runs as follows.

4.1. Taking Multiple Teaching Strategies as Result Variables

The variation component within the group σ2 is 0.41, χ2 is 91.423, the degrees of freedom are 29, and p < 0.001, and so there is a significant difference in the variation component between the groups—that is, there is a significant difference in the teacher effectiveness of each teacher. In addition, the value of the correlation coefficient ICC (1) within the group is 0.066, which means that 6.6% of the variation in the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness is affected by the different school situations. Under the influence of different school situations, a teacher’s teaching effectiveness is different, and so general regression statistical analysis should not only be used. Therefore, the differences between groups should be considered, and the hierarchical linear analysis should be used, as shown in

Table 7. Multiple teaching’s HLM hierarchy linear analysis

Dependent Variables and Parameter Estimation	Null Model	Random Parameter Regression Model	Intercept Prediction Mode	Slope Prediction Mode
Interceptγ00	3.871 ***	3.871 ***	3.871 ***	3.871 ***
	(104.806)	(104.761)	(103.101)	(104.873)
Individual level
Mortal leadership*slope modelβ1		0.300 ***	0.300 ***	0.309 ***
		(4.549)	(4.665)	(5.381)
Charismatic leadership*slope modelβ2		0.169 *	0.167 *	0.167 *
		(2.623)	(2.600)	(2.515)
Supportive leadership*slope modelβ3		0.106+	0.106+	0.095+
		(1.751)	(1.757)	(1.564)
Task-oriented leadership*slope modelβ4		0.198+	0.199+	0.100s+
		(1.618)	(1.650)	(1.682)
Day and night school β5		−0.092+	−0.089+	−0.089 *
		(−2.025)	(−1.917)	(−2.112)
Moderating effects from school level
Situationγ01			0.092 ***	0.145 ***
			(1.646)	(1.891)
Mortal leadership*school situationβ1*γ11				0.280 *
				(2.376)
Charismatic leadership*school situationβ2*γ21				−0.244 *
				(−2.357)
Supportive leadership*school situationβ3*γ31				−0.126
				(−1.045)
* school situationβ4*γ41				−0.562
				(−0.487)
Day and night school *school situationβ5*γ51				−0.231 *
				(−2.711)
τ00	0.029 ***	0.033 ***	0.030 ***	0.035 ***
τ11		0.073 **	0.071 ***	0.050 *
τ21		0.064 *	0.066 *	0.64 *
τ31		0.058+	0.057+	0.057+
τ41		0.069 **	0.067 **	0.068 **
τ51		0.016	0.018	0.014
σ2	0.410	0.286	0.285	0.286
Deviance	1828.101	1567.268	1559.389	1568.857

Note: The figure between brackets represents t; + represents p < 0.1; * represents p < 0.05; ** represents p < 0.01; and *** represents p < 0.001.

.

The within-group variance of the empty model of the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness σ2 = 0.410, and the within-group variance of the random coefficient model σ2 = 0.286. The explanatory variance R2 of the multiple teaching strategies of teaching effectiveness is 0.302. The teacher’s leadership style explains the variation degree of multiple teaching strategies in 30.2% of teacher effectiveness compared between daytime and nighttime departments.

In the slope part, moral leadership is 0.073 **, charismatic leadership is 0.064 *, support leadership is 0.058+, and task-oriented leadership is 0.069 **, and they all reach significant levels, as shown in Table 7. This indicates moral leadership, charismatic leadership, supportive leadership, and task-oriented leadership all have a significant impact on the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness. Because the variance components of the intercept term and the slope reach a significant level, this study uses the intercept prediction model to conduct a one-step analysis and discussion.

The analysis result may show that the school situation has a direct influence on the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness (γ01 = 0.092 ***). The explanatory variation of the school situation is R2 = (0.033–0.030)/ 0.06 = 9.1%, which means the school context only explains 9.1% of the variation in the first-level intercept error term, while the second-level school context variables still have significant variation, indicating that there are still other school context variables that affect the teaching effectiveness of teachers.

Moral leadership τ11 is 0.071 **, charismatic leadership τ21 is 0.066 *, support leadership τ31 is 0.057+, and task-oriented leadership τ41 is 0.067 **, with all reaching significant levels. Therefore, it is necessary to further analyze whether the slope variation can be explained by the situational variables of the school class.

The school situation has a significant adjustment effect between moral leadership and the multi-learning strategy in teacher effectiveness (γ11 = 0.280 *), and the relative variance component is 0.050 *. There is a significant difference in the moderating effect of the school situation between the charismatic leadership and the multi-learning strategy in teacher effectiveness (γ21= −0.244 *), and the variance component value is 0.640 *, which means that the school situation is under moral leadership and charismatic leadership. The multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness have a moderating effect. Relatively speaking, the school situation has no significant effect on supporting leadership (γ31 = −0.126, τ31 = 0.027) and task-oriented leadership (γ41 = −0.562, τ41 = 0.022), which means that the school situation is in supporting leadership, and task-oriented leadership does not have a moderating effect on the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness.

4.2. Taking Class Management as the Resulting Variable

The analysis result shows that the variation component within the group σ2 is 0.33, χ2 is 74.891, the degrees of freedom are 29, and p < 0.001. Thus, there is a significant difference in the variation component between the groups—that is, there is a significant difference in the teacher effectiveness of each teacher. In addition, the intra-group correlation coefficient ICC (1) value is 0.048, which means that 4.8% of the variance of class management in the teacher’s ability is affected by the school situation.

The within-group variance of the empty model of teacher effectiveness σ2 = 0.33, and the within-group variance of the random coefficient regression model σ2 = 0.211. Hence, the explanatory variance R2 of the classroom management of teaching effectiveness is 0.361, which is the teacher’s leadership style. The daytime and nighttime departments explain the degree of variation in class management is 36.1% of teacher effectiveness. The deviation value of the random parameter model (deviance) is 1293.191, which is lower than the deviation value of the empty model. In terms of results, the random parameter model is relatively better than the empty model.

When τ00 is 0.021 ***, it can be known that there are still enough intercept terms between different school situations, the variance of moral leadership in the slope part is 0.063 **, the variance of charismatic leadership is 0.049+, the variance of supporting leadership is 0.048+, and the variance of task-oriented leadership is 0.061 *. All reach significant levels, as shown in

Table 8. HLM hierarchy linear analysis

Dependent Variables and Parameter Estimation	Null Model	Random Parameter Regression Model	Intercept Prediction Mode	Slope Prediction Mode
Interceptγ00	3.993 ***	3.993 ***	3.993 ***	3.993 ***
	(132.386)	(132.339)	(134.371)	(134.420)
Mortal leadership × slope modelβ1		0.283 ***	0.280 ***	0.280 ***
		(4.605)	(4.578)	(5.216)
Charismatic leadership × slope modelβ2		0.071+	0.070+	0.076+
		(1.453)	(1.433)	(1.554)
Supportive leadership × slope modelβ3		0.101 *	0.102 *	0.096 *
		(2.274)	(2.296)	(2.161)
Task-oriented leadership × slope modelβ4		0.227 ***	0.230 ***	0.221 ***
		(4.859)	(4.866)	(4.629)
Day and night school		−0.051	−0.052	−0.054
		(−1.215)	(−1.235)	(−1.276)
Moderating effects from school level
Situationγ01			0.084 **	0.114 **
			(1.186)	(0.942)
Mortal leadership × school situationβ1 × γ11				0.291 *
				(2.706)
Charismatic leadership × school situationβ2 × γ21				−0.185 *
				(−2.073)
Supportive leadership × school situationβ3 × γ31				0.212+
				(1.824)
Task-oriented leadership × school situationβ4 × γ41				−0.011
				(−0.126)
Day and night school × school situationβ5 × γ51				0.017
				(0.190)
τ00	0.017 ***	0.021 ***	0.017 ***	0.022 ***
τ11		0.063 **	0.062 **	0.042+
τ21		0.049+	0.048+	0.048+
τ31		0.048+	0.047+	0.047+
τ41		0.061 *	0.061 *	0.058 *
τ51		0.004	0.005	0.006
σ2	0.33	0.211	0.211	0.211
Deviance	1635.118	1293.191	1285.770	1284.691

Note: The figure between brackets represents t; + represents p < 0.1; * represents p < 0.05; ** represents p < 0.01; and *** represents p < 0.001.

, indicating that moral leadership, charismatic leadership, supportive leadership, and task-oriented leadership are all significant to the effective class management of teachers. Because the variance component of the intercept term and the slope reach a significant level, this study uses the intercept prediction model to conduct a one-step analysis and a discussion [42].

There is still a significant difference between different school situations and the classroom management of teacher effectiveness (0.017 ***). The results show that the school situation has a direct impact on the classroom management of teacher effectiveness (γ01 = 0.084 **). The explanatory variation of the context R2 = (0.021–0.017)/0.021 = 19% means the school context only explains 19% of the variation in the intercept error term of the first level, while the variation of the second level school context variable is still significant. It indicates that there are still other school situational variables that affect the teaching effectiveness of teachers, and so further exploration and analysis are warranted.

Moral leadership τ11 is 0.062 **, charismatic leadership τ21 is 0.048+, support leadership τ31 is 0.047+, and task-oriented leadership τ41 is 0.061 **, and all reach significant levels. Therefore, it is necessary to further analyze whether the variation of the slope can be explained by the situational variables of the school class.

The school situation shows a significant adjustment effect between moral leadership and class management in teacher effectiveness (γ11 = 0.291 *), and its variance component is 0.042. There is a significant difference in the moderating effect between the school situation in the class management of charismatic leadership and teacher effectiveness (γ21= −0.185 *), and the variance value is 0.048+, which supports the leadership in the class management of teacher effectiveness and shows a significant difference. The moderation effect (γ31 = 0.212+) and its variance component are 0.047+, which means that the school situation has a moderating effect on the management of the teacher’s effective class in terms of moral leadership, charismatic leadership, and supportive leadership.

Relatively speaking, the adjustment effect of the school situation on task-oriented leadership (γ41 = 0.017, τ41 = 0.54) is not significant. It implies that the school situation does not have the effect of adjusting the task-oriented leadership on the classroom management of teacher effectiveness.

5. Discussion

5.1. Multiple Teaching Strategies

The results of the research hypothesis for the multiple teaching strategies in this study are in

Table 9. Summary of multiple teaching strategies’s research hypotheses

Research Hypothesis	Hypothesis Testing	Results
Hypothesis 1a	There is a positive correlation between multiple teaching strategies supporting leadership and teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 2a	Charismatic leadership positively correlates with multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 3a	There is a positive correlation between ethical leadership and multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 4a	Task-oriented leadership positively correlates with multiple teaching strategies for teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 5a	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers support multiple teaching strategies in that leadership positively impacts the teacher’s effectiveness in high school situations.	No
Hypothesis 6a	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ charismatic leadership positively influences the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	Yes
Hypothesis 7a	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ moral leadership positively affects the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	Yes
Hypothesis 8a	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ task-oriented leadership positively affects the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	No

.

Through HL’s random parameter regression model, it can be seen that the four leadership styles have significant differences in the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness (Hypothesis 1a, Hypothesis 2a, Hypothesis 3a, Hypothesis 4a). Under the control of the school’s situation, moral leadership and charismatic leadership have a moderating effect on the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness (Hypothesis 6a, Hypothesis 7a).

From Figure 2, in the high school situation, the relationship between moral leadership and multiple teaching strategies is higher than that in the middle school situation. Under the adjustment of the high school situation, the higher the teacher’s moral leadership is, the greater the multiple teaching strategies are. In addition, in a middle school situation, when the teacher’s moral leadership is below a certain critical point (the intersection of the two lines), the effectiveness of multiple teaching strategies will be higher than the high school situation’s impact.

Figure 3 shows in the middle school situation that the slope of charismatic leadership and multiple teaching strategies is higher than that of the high school situation. that is, in the middle school situation, the relationship between charismatic leadership and multiple teaching strategies is too high. Under the adjustment of the high school situation, the higher the teacher’s charismatic leadership is, the higher the multiple teaching strategies are. However, in the middle school situation, when the teacher’s charismatic leadership exceeds a certain critical point (the intersection of the two lines), the school situation is no longer advantageous. Under the influence of the middle school situation, the effectiveness of multiple teaching strategies will be higher than that under the high school situation.

5.2. Class Management

The results of the research hypothesis for the multiple teaching strategies in this study are in

Table 10. Summary of class management ‘sresearch hypotheses

Research Hypothesis	Hypothesis Testing	Results
Hypothesis 1b	There is a positive impact between class management supporting leadership and teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 2b	Charismatic leadership positively correlates with class management of teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 3b	There is a positive correlation between ethical leadership and class management of teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 4b	Task-oriented leadership positively correlates with class management of teacher effectiveness.	Yes
Hypothesis 5b	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers support class management in that leadership positively impacts teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	Yes
Hypothesis 6b	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ charismatic leadership positively affect class management of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	Yes
Hypothesis 7b	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ moral leadership positively affects the class management of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	Yes
Hypothesis 8b	Compared to lower school situations, vocational high school teachers’ task-oriented leadership positively affects the class management of teacher effectiveness in high school situations.	No

.

Through HL’s random parameter regression model, it can be known that the four leadership styles have significant differences in the class management of their teacher effectiveness. The relevant research hypotheses (Hypothesis 1b, Hypothesis 2b, Hypothesis 3b, Hypothesis 4b) are verified, and the results are similar to the results of a teacher’s own leadership style will accurately reflect that teacher’s effectiveness in class management [43].

According to the analysis results of HLM, moral leadership, charismatic leadership, and supportive leadership have a moderating effect on the classroom management of teacher effectiveness under the control of the school’s situation, thus verifying relevant research hypotheses (Hypothesis 5b, Hypothesis 6b, Hypothesis 7b).

Figure 4 shows in high school situations that the slopes of moral leadership and class management are higher than in middle school situations. In addition, in middle school situations, when the teacher’s moral leadership is lower than a certain critical point (the intersection of the two lines), the middle school situation influence has an advantage.

Figure 5 shows in middle school situations that the slopes of charismatic leadership and class management are higher than that of the high school situation–-that is, in the middle school situation, the relationship between charismatic leadership and class management is too high. In a middle school situation, the higher the teacher’s charismatic leadership is, the higher the class management will be. However, compared to the high school situation, in the middle school situation, when the teacher’s charismatic leadership is below a certain critical point (the intersection of the two lines), the middle school situation does not have the advantage.

Figure 6 shows, in the context of high schools, that the slopes of support for leadership and class management are higher than that of middle schools. In other words, in the context of high schools, the relationship between support for leadership and class management is higher than that of the middle school situation. Under the influence of a high school situation, the higher the teacher’s support and leadership are, the greater the efficiency of class management is. In addition, from the perspective of curriculum teaching, there are many factors that affect students’ learning motivation. This study combined the results with the argument and conclusion from other foreign scholars to analysis and discuss it. From the research results, it can be found that teachers improve flexibility to fully demonstrate various leadership styles, which will obviously help improve students’ learning motivation [44]. When students set up their clear goal, teachers can also change to use the task-oriented leadership style to improve students’ motivation [45]. However, for intelligence-related subjects—such as mathematics, etc.—in order to improve the intrinsic motivation of learning, it is necessary to demonstrate a support leadership style (support leadership). Students will have the improved learning effect [46].

5.3. Research Recommendations

In recent years, the curriculum of global schools has been chaotic due to the spread of the epidemic. For example: suspension of classes has become necessary in order to reduce human-to-human contact. Therefore, E-learning has gradually become the main way of learning under this situation. Contemporary technology has been improved and developed as a very professional level. As we can see that VR technology is one of the E-learning tools which can showcase or transfer the abstract things and the dangerous experiments to reification. However, under the technology-led distance teaching [47,48], whether or not the teaching methods which are used through E-learning tools can maintain the original teaching effect become a questionable issue for follow-up researchers.

6. Conclusions

From the statistical analysis of HLM, it can be seen that the ethical leadership, charismatic leadership, supportive leadership, and task-oriented leadership of vocational high school teacher’ leadership styles and the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness and class management all have significantly positive effects. Therefore, the conclusion of this research is that if a teacher is willing to lead the class to learn and manage the class with care, then this will invisibly affect the teacher’s own teacher efficiency so that the teacher’s leadership style has a positive impact on such efficiency.

Second, when the school situation is adjusted, the moral and charismatic leadership of vocational high school teachers have a moderating effect on the multiple teaching strategies of teacher effectiveness–-that is, supporting leadership and task-oriented leadership are not affected by the school’s moderating effect. However, it has been learned from the literature that supporting leadership is relationship-oriented; task-oriented leadership is work-oriented. Therefore, this study finds that both relationship-oriented and work-oriented leaderships have factors that are not fully regulated by the school situation. Therefore, it is not appropriate to discuss leadership styles only. The study further finds that relationship-oriented charismatic leadership and work-oriented moral leadership are impacted by the moderating effect of the school situation. Therefore, the conclusion of this study is that when a teacher has a charismatic leadership style or a moral leadership style, it is more effective under multiple teaching strategies [49].

Third, under the adjustment of the school situation, the moral leadership, charismatic leadership, and supportive leadership of vocational high school teachers all have a moderating effect on the effective class management of teachers.

From the above, we also know that—for teacher effectiveness—no matter what kind of leadership style a teacher has, the school situation may not be able to positively influence teacher effectiveness of each leadership style. Therefore, it is difficult to maintain good teacher effectiveness if teachers use only one leadership style to conduct class management or teaching. Therefore, teachers should also consider the context of the school to see which leadership style they prefer in order to achieve better teacher effectiveness.