Relationship Between School Leadership, Academic Dispositions, and Student Academic Performance: Meaning Making of PISA 2022 Results

Abstract

School leadership plays a critical role in shaping student academic performance. Despite the UAE’s recognition as one of the leading nations globally for quality education, research on the impact of leadership practices on performance in international assessments like PISA remains scarce. This study explores the influence of school leadership on students’ performance in the UAE’s schools. The PISA 2022 UAE database containing data on 24,600 15-year-old students across 840 schools was used to assess mathematical literacy based on their ability to apply math concepts and their attitudes toward the subject. Insights into leadership practices were utilized using responses from school principals in the PISA 2022 school leaders’ questionnaire. The results demonstrate that leadership practices significantly influence student outcomes. Schools where leaders emphasize teacher accountability and professional development show improved mathematics performance, lower anxiety levels, and enhanced self-efficacy among students. Conversely, excessive focus on disciplinary measures or teaching skill improvements is associated with reduced student self-efficacy. These findings highlight the importance of adaptive leadership approaches that consider local educational contexts, balancing accountability and support to optimize both student performance and well-being. By refining leadership practices, schools can drive meaningful improvements in student success and better equip learners to thrive in global educational benchmarks.

1. Introduction

The importance of school leadership in influencing student academic performance, which significantly impacts overall school effectiveness and improvement, has been extensively researched and documented in several studies (Kemethofer et al., 2023; López Rupérez et al., 2022; Day et al., 2009; V. M. J. Robinson et al., 2008). Over the past few decades, school leaders have evolved from taking on managerial roles to being more actively engaged in teaching and learning practices within their school environments. Eventually, several leadership styles emerged and have been documented in the literature, with transformational (Burns, 1978; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2008; Bush & Glover, 2014), instructional (Hallinger, 2005; Pont et al., 2008; Bush & Glover, 2014), and distributed leadership (Bush & Glover, 2014; Hallinger & Heck, 2010; Day & Harris, 2002) styles being the most prominent and well-studied ones. However, scholars argue that the intermingling of leadership styles in day-to-day school practices requires school leaders to be agile and adaptive to their own school context (Hallinger, 2018; Litz et al., 2020).

The emphasis on enhancing student performance also extends beyond the school level, considering that the leaders of many countries aim to enhance their educational systems at the national level. Consequently, governments worldwide are actively investing in and engaging with international standardized assessments such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science to assess and enhance their educational practices at the national level (OECD, 2019a).

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is one of these nations and has an explicit vision to offer an “excellent quality of education” (referred to as UAE Centennial 2071). Moreover, the UAE’s 2021 National Vision specifically emphasized that “a complete transformation of the current education system and teaching methods is essential”. The UAE aims to “rank among the best in the world in reading, mathematics, and science exams” and move to the top 15 countries for TIMSS and one of the top 20 countries for PISA (UAE Ministry of Cabinet Affairs, n.d.). Despite these aspiring visions and goals, limited research has been conducted on PISA results in the context of the UAE that could guide strategies to enhance student performance in such international assessments. The Ministry of Education (MoE) published a comprehensive report in 2017 entitled “Performance of 15-year-olds in the UAE: A First-Rate Education for the Workforce”, which analyzed the PISA 2015 results. However, the report primarily focuses on student performance and its trends, positioning the UAE within the global landscape in terms of reading, mathematics, and science performance and comparing performance based on gender differences (MoE, 2017). Another report issued by the Knowledge and Human Development Authority (KHDA) in 2017 narrowed down its focus specifically to Dubai and the performance of 15-year-olds (KHDA, 2017). More recent research studies have examined how language and curricula impact academic performance in terms of PISA (Ibrahim & Alhosani, 2020) and the gap between national and expatriate students in the UAE (Marquez et al., 2022) and configurations of low-performing students (Morgan & Ibrahim, 2020). Although some studies have explored the relationship between school leadership and student performance, very few have investigated the role of school leadership in students’ mathematics academic dispositions and performance in the Emirati context. Hence, this study explicitly aims to investigate how school leadership practices predict mathematics performance and academic dispositions among UAE students using PISA 2022 data. Specifically, it explores the associations between school principals’ self-reported leadership behaviors (e.g., fostering a positive and supportive learning environment, supporting diverse student needs, promoting collaboration and professional development opportunities, encouraging student agency, etc.), mathematics performance, and academic dispositions, such as self-efficacy and anxiety. By contextualizing this study in the UAE’s ambitious education reform efforts, it seeks to provide actionable insights for policy and practice.

The research questions are as follows:

How well do school leadership practices predict students’ academic performance in mathematics?

How well do school leadership practices predict students’ academic dispositions in mathematics?

In the following sections, we provide a comprehensive overview of the role of school leadership in influencing student performance and academic dispositions as supported by the existing literature. Then, we offer a contextual overview of the educational landscape in the UAE, including its current status and the narrative of PISA. Subsequently, we outline the methodology, and discuss the results. Finally, we conclude this article with implications and recommendations for school leaders, policymakers, and educational governing entities.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. School Leadership and Student Academic Performance

Successful leadership styles and models significantly impact students’ academic performance (Hallinger, 2018). The most prominent theories are instructional, transformational, and distributed leadership (Bush, 2020). According to Leithwood et al. (2004), the impact of school leadership on student learning outcomes is second only to classroom teaching. Therefore, our understanding of the relationship between school leadership and student learning outcomes for principal training programs and assessments, educational policy, and the skills required for effective school leadership must be examined and enhanced. For a comprehensive understanding of how leaders’ roles, functions, and styles affect student achievement, expanding empirical research is essential. Building on this foundation, the exploration of successful leadership theories reveals that they focus on specific mechanisms through which leaders influence teaching and learning. Among these, instructional, transformational, and distributed leadership styles stand out for their ability to connect leadership practices to educational outcomes (Kythreotis & Antoniou, 2015). Instructional leadership, which focuses on the connection between leadership and education (Bush & Glover, 2014; Fromm et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2012; Louis et al., 2010; V. M. J. Robinson et al., 2008), emphasizes the principal’s pivotal role in influencing student achievement and educational outcomes by directly overseeing instructional programs (Hallinger, 2005; Pont et al., 2008). Alam and Ahmad (2017) explain that actively engaged school leaders in curriculum oversight and promoting effective teaching and learning practices positively influence student performance. Similarly, Liu and Hallinger (2018) highlight how instructional leadership in Chinese schools enhances teacher self-efficacy and professional practices, which significantly influences student performance. Dutta and Sahney (2022) examine the influence of instructional leadership on student achievement through their impact on school culture and teacher performance. They highlight the importance of a positive school climate in enhancing teacher performance and, consequently, student achievement.

Instructional leadership also has a crucial role in enhancing student learning outcomes. Dutta and Sahney’s (2022) study highlights the significance of the interactions between principals, teachers, and staff members, focusing on classroom instruction, student performance, and curricula. They suggested that school leaders can influence school outcomes indirectly through various avenues such as decision-making, goal setting, communicating expectations, managing stakeholders, and monitoring work activities. Instructional leadership impacts student learning by shaping the school environment, defining the school’s mission and educational vision, setting clear goals, motivating staff, and cultivating a positive school culture that enhances student engagement (Harris & Jones, 2023).

Transformational leadership enhances followers’ attitudes, motivation, norms, behaviors, achievements, and actions (Leithwood et al., 2020). Transformational educational settings are characterized by shared vision-building, high-performance expectations, workplace accord, intellectual stimulation, and enthusiasm (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2005; Leithwood et al., 2010). These characteristics lead to enhanced commitment to organizational goals, resulting in greater organizational productivity, staff competency, educational outcomes, and positive change and innovation (Bush & Glover, 2014). Studies have found a high correlation between transformational leadership and student effects, including test scores, and substantial indirect effects of transformational leadership were also identified; these include assisting staff members in developing a collaborative culture, fostering teacher development, and promoting compliance (Leithwood et al., 2020).

As noted by Bush and Glover (2014), distributed leadership is a relatively new approach to educational leadership that has gained popularity in recent years. Researchers including Leithwood et al. (2020) have found that schools with high levels of student achievement attribute their success to the influence of distributed leadership. Similarly, Harris and Spillane (2008) reiterated that distributed leadership has a positive impact on organizational outcomes and student achievement. According to Hallinger and Heck (2010), distributed leadership can enhance academic capacity, resulting in improved student learning and other positive educational outcomes. Several authors, including Bush and Glover (2014), Lin (2022), and Harris (2003), emphasized the importance of teacher leadership in successful distributed leadership within schools. They argued that implementing authentic distributed leadership without teachers as leaders would be challenging. Moreover, Silins and Mulford (2007), in their large extensive survey study involving over 2500 teachers and their leaders, confirmed that there is strong evidence of increased student outcomes when leadership is distributed and teachers are empowered.

In recent years, prominent leadership models in educational research have emerged. Nevertheless, Hallinger (2011) proposed a synthesized model that suggests that school leaders operate in an “open system” consisting of culture, institutional systems, school organization, staff, and community. This model emphasizes that leaders’ values, beliefs, knowledge, and experiences inform their leadership practices, which indirectly impact student learning through school-level processes and conditions (Leithwood et al., 2010; V. M. J. Robinson et al., 2008). Likewise, Gurr et al. (2022) developed an open system model based on the International Successful School Principal Project, describing schools as a “continuous cycle of input–transformation–output with feedback loops”. The inputs include variables that drive transformations in teaching and learning, school capacity building, school directions, and network collaborations, leading to enhanced outputs in student and school outcomes. These stages are influenced by various external forces, such as economic, sociocultural, technological, institutional, and political factors (Gurr et al., 2022, p. 35).

V. M. J. Robinson et al. (2008) also made a seminal contribution to school leadership research. Their meta-analysis is highly respected for identifying five leadership practices or dimensions rather than focusing on specific leadership styles. Their study investigates the impact of each leadership dimension on essential student outcomes, such as establishing goals and expectations, strategic resourcing, planning and evaluating teaching and curricula, promoting teacher learning and development, and ensuring a supportive environment.

Although a range of leadership frameworks have been developed in the field, V. M. J. Robinson et al.’s (2008) five dimensions form a strong and actionable model for defining leadership effectiveness and best apply to this study in terms of their focus on measurable output and pragmatic application. They also best apply to the 2022 PISA study because they mirror the leadership behaviors measured in the School Questionnaire in PISA, providing a systemic model with which to bridge leadership practice and academic performance and dispositions in students.

2.2. School Leadership and Academic Dispositions

Academic dispositions include students’ attitudes, values, and beliefs toward learning, as well as their motivation, self-efficacy, and resilience, all of which influence academic performance (Pekrun et al., 2017). Strong leadership plays a vital role in cultivating these dispositions by creating supportive school environments that enhance engagement and motivation (Day & Leithwood, 2007; Leithwood et al., 2004; Pekrun et al., 2017). They also set high expectations and challenge students to reach their full potential during their learning experiences (Hitt & Tucker, 2016). Leaders foster resilience and positive academic dispositions in students when they model and promote a growth mindset, emphasizing that challenges are valuable learning experiences (Day & Gu, 2007/2014).

Research emphasizes the essential role of school leadership in enhancing student learning outcomes in mathematics. Pope (2002) suggested that effective school leaders create environments that support academic growth. Leithwood and Jantzi (2008) found that fostering a school culture that prioritizes mathematics learning positively influences students’ attitudes toward the subject. Further studies by Leithwood and Jantzi (2008) and Wang and Holcombe (2010) established a clear connection between effective school leadership and student performance, including their mathematical dispositions. Generally, students with a positive attitude toward mathematics engage in scientific exploration and show interest in other STEM subjects.

School leaders can further support student outcomes by implementing strategies that enhance mathematics instruction, ensuring well-resourced schools, and fostering a culture of scientific inquiry (Leithwood et al., 2004). Encouraging scientific inquiry not only strengthens critical thinking skills but also nurtures a deep desire for knowledge among students (Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003). Hallinger and Murphy (1985) explained that instructional leadership influences students’ academic attitudes. School leaders who actively contribute to the teaching and learning process; provide meaningful, constructive feedback; and support teachers in applying sufficient pedagogical strategies contribute to positive student attitudes toward mathematics. Likewise, Waters and Marzano (2006) highlighted the importance of leadership in establishing a shared vision for mathematics education. When school leaders demonstrate a clear vision and involve stakeholders in decision-making, students are more likely to develop positive mathematical dispositions. Additionally, Loucks-Horsley et al. (2003) and Supovitz and Turner (2000) explained that teacher development programs could have a significant impact on mathematics instruction and student achievement. Effective school leaders ensure that teachers receive the necessary support to enhance mathematics teaching and learning. Supovitz et al. (2010) found that high-quality professional development programs focusing on content knowledge, pedagogical strategies, and classroom management significantly improve student mathematics performance (Buczynski & Hansen, 2010).

2.3. Relationship Between School Leadership and Mathematics Academic Dispositions

Several studies claim a strong correlation between students’ mathematical dispositions, school leadership, and academic performance (Kamid et al., 2021). Colita and Genuba (2019) suggested that a positive disposition is characterized by confidence, optimism, and a growth mindset which have a significant influence on students’ attitude and performance in mathematics. Research suggests that strong leadership plays an essential role in shaping students’ attitudes toward mathematics, which affects their performance (Pizon & Ytoc, 2021). Strong educational leaders help cultivate a positive attitude toward mathematics and influence students’ mindsets and engagement with the subject, as pointed out by Mata et al. (2012), Pont et al. (2008), and Pizon and Ytoc (2021). Similarly, Fullan (2015) explained that when school leaders provide sufficient and appropriate support, students appreciate learning mathematics and show more enthusiasm.

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM, 2000) defined mathematical disposition as a positive mindset toward the subject, encompassing behaviors, aspirations, concerns, dedication, and a natural inclination to approach mathematics with enthusiasm. Nasir and Cobb (2008) defined interest as an intrinsic motivation to engage with mathematics, self-efficacy as the belief in one’s ability to succeed, perseverance as the persistence through challenges, attitudes as overall feelings and beliefs, confidence as the belief in mathematical ability, and curiosity in mathematics as the desire to explore mathematical concepts beyond the curriculum. The key indicators of a positive mathematical disposition, as identified by the NCTM (2000), include confidence; problem-solving; diligence in addressing mathematical challenges; interest and curiosity in the subject; self-reflection and self-assessment regarding mathematical processes; the recognition of the practical applications of mathematics in various fields and real-world contexts; and an appreciation of mathematics as a language, a set of values, and a cultural asset. These dispositions are influenced by school leadership through the creation of a supportive environment that encourages professional development for teachers, enhances student engagement, and promotes real-world applications, including self-reflection that helps students build positive dispositions.

School leadership plays a crucial role in shaping teaching and learning and significantly influencing students’ academic achievement in mathematics. Lochmiller and Cunningham’s (2019) systematic literature review explored the role of instructional leadership in supporting mathematics education, indicating that leaders support content area instruction by facilitating high-quality instructional experiences through curricular and assessment leadership. They found that leadership frequently involves establishing organizational conditions that support teachers’ efforts to improve their own practices instead of direct leadership action on the part of instructional leaders. Stein and Nelson (2003) explored a primary school principal’s approach in implementing formative evaluations for a math teacher which transformed his practice. The school participated in a specialized leadership course focused on mathematics teaching and learning which provided him with a deeper understanding of mathematical concepts. This experience allowed him to engage effectively in discussions and understand the subject’s importance. Also, the experience enabled him to prioritize evaluating mathematical instructional quality, assessing teacher’s pedagogical practices, and introducing relevant professional development opportunities. They further explained that this approach improved teachers’ practices and had a direct impact on students’ performance in mathematics.

Colita and Genuba (2019) conducted a study to explore various areas of school culture to understand the factors that influence students’ mathematical dispositions. They found that high expectations were the strongest predictor of student success in mathematics. They further explained that high expectations helped them build confidence, metacognitive skills, perseverance, and an overall sense of achievement. V. M. Robinson (2006) further explained that there is a positive correlation between setting high expectations, student-centered learning, and personalized teachers’ professional development and the quality of instructional practices and student achievement. This aligns with findings from Ramazan et al. (2023) who examined PISA 2012 data to find that the classroom environment was a major predictor of students’ attitudes toward mathematics and their academic performance in the subject. Inclusive school leaders who provide more inclusive teaching and learning environments, provide appropriate resources for all, and ensure strong relationships between students, their teachers, and other stakeholders have a positive impact on students’ attitudes toward mathematics (Fowler & Jouganatos, 2020; Nasir & Cobb, 2008). Research also claims that shared leadership models have a positive impact on student learning. Marks and Printy (2003) and Rigelman and Lewis (2022) found a sustained improvement in students’ performance in mathematics when school leaders fostered a collaborative culture in their schools. They improve instructional quality by providing ongoing professional development programs (Darling-Hammond et al., 2009; Supovitz & Poglinco, 2001). Moreover, school leaders play a vital role in providing resources like instructional materials and technology to support high-quality mathematics instruction (Blankstein, 2004).

School leaders also play a crucial role in shaping the school’s culture, which can influence students’ attitudes toward mathematics. Hallinger and Heck (2010) highlighted that schools with a positive organizational culture, characterized by collaboration, trust, and shared vision, tend to have engaged and motivated students in mathematics. Leaders can further influence teaching practices by promoting research-based strategies, such as feedback, formative assessment, and direct instruction, identified by Hattie (2009) as effective for improving student achievement. Encouraging challenging, real-world experiences, such as collaborative problem-solving and project-based learning, can enhance students’ math attitudes, as suggested by Boaler (2002).

Leithwood and Jantzi (2005) found a link between effective leadership and improved student outcomes, while Harris and Muijs (2005) highlighted the importance of teacher collaboration and professional learning communities. Additionally, Waters et al. (2003) and Hoy and Tarter (1997) underscored the impact of strong instructional leadership and safe, supportive school environments on mathematics achievement.

Research shows that effective school leadership plays a key role in shaping students’ attitudes and performance in mathematics. Leadership practices such as fostering a positive school culture, setting high expectations, and supporting professional development enhance student motivation and engagement in math. Studies highlight that schools with collaborative, trusting environments lead to better student outcomes, while instructional leadership helps improve teaching practices. School leaders who provide resources, promote practical learning experiences, and maintain high expectations contribute to positive mathematical dispositions and academic success.

2.4. Current State of Education and PISA Research in UAE

The UAE has undergone significant changes in its education system over the past two decades. The UAE’s government has recognized that education is critical to the country’s long-term economic and social development and has implemented a range of reforms aimed at improving the quality and accessibility of education across the country. At the national level, education reforms have included adopting various strategies for change, such as clarifying policies, setting new standards, restructuring educational management, and mobilizing resources (Litz & Scott, 2017). At the emirate level, educational change is ongoing, and entities such as KHDA and Abu (ADEK) have been working alongside the UAE’s MoE to ensure successful policy implementation (Blaik Hourani et al., 2023; Litz & Scott, 2017). In this way, the government has established professional performance standards for teachers and principals, made great strides in modernizing curricula, and created bilingual curricula (i.e., English and Arabic), in addition to moving away from rote learning methodologies to pedagogic approaches that use problem-solving and critical thinking. Additionally, budgets have been increased, technology-rich schools have been established, and educational infrastructure, such as buildings, sports facilities, classroom resources, libraries, and learning laboratories, have been enhanced. Moreover, the government has mandated that schools adopt programs to improve basic skills, enforce discipline, require attendance, assist students with exam preparation, establish improved professional development and mentoring programs, and focus on enhancing teachers’ and principals’ overall skills (Blaik Hourani et al., 2023; Litz & Scott, 2017). At the same time, large-scale assessments, such as PISA, have also gained prominence in the educational landscape of the UAE as a means of evaluating educational outcomes and informing policy decisions, and more and more research has been conducted on the performance of UAE students using PISA and other global assessments.

In recent years, the UAE has enhanced its education system and average scores for reading, and those for mathematics and science have increased, as well as the number of students below the basic level (OECD, 2019a). Nevertheless, studies report on issues regarding student performance. Buckner (2018), for example, pointed out that low-income students lag behind their wealthier peers due to inadequate opportunities, as well as language and cultural issues. Their study also noted that, while the UAE’s government has spent a great deal of effort on improving its international ranking positions, it has not paid enough attention to poor Emirati students. To close this gap and guarantee more equity in education, Buckner (2018) recommended implementing strategies such as improving educational materials and support systems.

Alternatively, Marquez et al. (2022) compared the achievement of Emirati and expatriate students in the UAE using PISA data. Their research found that expatriate students outperformed Emirati students in all the areas studied, including mathematics, reading, and science. In mathematics, the gap was especially wide. The authors argued that the causes of this gap could include sociodemographic status, language, and culture. They also noted that this gap could worsen social inequality and compromise the UAE’s modernization and development agenda. To meet these challenges, the authors suggested increasing the availability of and access to educational resources and enhancing the linguistic competence of Emirati students.

In the same manner, Ibrahim and Alhosani (2020) examined the role of language and the curriculum in the achievement of Emirati students in large-scale international assessments. Their results showed that students who studied in English and followed an international curriculum performed better than those who were taught in Arabic and followed the national curriculum. The study suggested that adopting more English-language instruction and incorporating international curricula may enhance Emirati students’ performance on international assessments. Furthermore, the authors pointed out that providing targeted language support and other educational resources would improve the learning opportunities for all children in the UAE.

Gogliotti (2020) investigated the determinants of reading performance in students in the UAE. This study also showed that school facilities and infrastructure such as libraries and technology affected students’ performance on the PISA reading test. Other significant factors were socioeconomic status, language, and parental education. Gogliotti (2020) suggested that more funding should be put into educational resources and the specific problems of Emirati students, for instance, by extending the opportunity for quality education and language development to enhance students’ academic performance and their general well-being.

Almarashdi and Jarrah (2023) examined the mathematical skills of the UAE’s tenth-grade students through PISA problem-solving items. The study revealed that students’ mathematical literacy depended on the level of the problems. This study also demonstrated that students performed well in data analysis and probability but struggled with geometry and algebra. As such, the authors recommended that teachers focus on developing students’ problem-solving skills in addition to improving their understanding of missing and/or weak concepts from other areas. They also suggested that the government should develop policies and practices that improve students’ mathematical performance.

Morgan and Ibrahim (2020) considered how poor performers are classified in the context of large-scale international assessments. Through their analysis, the authors identified three well-defined categories of low-performing students: “low achievers”, “potential achievers”, and “low-emerging bilinguals”. Moreover, these classifications were found to be influenced by assessment frameworks, policy priorities, and cultural norms regarding education and language. The authors concluded that how students are sorted in these assessments is important as it impacts the perceptions of students, policies, and practices and can result in the stereotyping of low-performing students.

Finally, Morgan (2018) assessed Qatar and the UAE’s government strategies towards large-scale international assessments. Morgan (2018) suggested that large-scale assessments serve political and economic agendas in many countries and noted that this can result in prioritizing standardized testing over other systemic educational priorities which can negatively impact students’ well-being and overall learning outcomes. The author also argued that these assessments should be utilized for improving educational outcomes as opposed to being a spectacle for global promotion.

Overall, the limited but increasing number of studies on large-scale assessments in the UAE indicates their significant role in shaping educational policy decisions. Additionally, studies indicated that variables such as gender, SES, parental education, school resources, teacher quality, and culture contribute to student performance in the UAE. However, research on other factors, such as school leadership practices that influence students’ attitudes and engagement, is lacking. Therefore, further research is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of specific elements (e.g., practices and strategies) that are the most effective in promoting positive academic dispositions in the UAE.

3. Method

3.1. Study Setting and Database

This study used the PISA 2022 UAE database. PISA is conducted triennially and measures the reading, mathematics, and science skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students. PISA is conducted in 81 countries and economies, and over half a million students from 21,629 schools participated in PISA 2022 (OECD, 2023). The schools were selected through a stratified random sampling process to ensure that the sample of schools was representative of the target population of 15-year-old students in each country or economy that participated in the survey. A total of 24,600 15-year-old students (M_age = 15.85 years, SD = 0.29; 49% female) from 840 schools in the UAE participated in PISA 2022.

3.2. Measures

As part of the PISA 2022 School Questionnaire (Appendix A), principals were asked to complete a set of questions designed to assess leadership practices and behaviors in schools. Seven items were rated on a Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (never or almost never) to 5 (every day or almost every day). PISA 2022 specifically focused on mathematical literacy, with an emphasis on students’ ability to apply mathematical knowledge to real-life situations and to analyze, explain, and interpret mathematics-related information (OECD, 2023). The PISA 2022 mathematical literacy scale served as a measure of students’ academic performance in the study. PISA 2022 also measured students’ dispositions toward mathematics (OECD, 2023). The following PISA 2022 scales were used to assess students’ academic dispositions: mathematics self-efficacy—formal and applied mathematics (MATHEFF; nine items; e.g., “Calculating how much more expensive a computer would be after adding tax”); mathematics self-efficacy—mathematical reasoning and 21st-century mathematics (MATHEF21; 10 items; e.g., “Using the concept of statistical variation to make a decision”); mathematics anxiety (ANXMAT; six items; e.g., “I often worry that it will be difficult for me in mathematics classes”); and proactive mathematics study behavior (MATHPERS; nine items; e.g., “I put effort into my assignments for mathematics class.”). All items were rated on a five-point Likert-type scale. The covariates in this study were gender (female = 1) and family SES (economic, social, and cultural status).

3.3. Data Analysis Procedures

The data were cleaned and prepared for analysis by checking for missing data, outliers, and other data quality issues. The data were screened for univariate and multivariate outliers. The skewness and kurtosis values were checked. The Mahalanobis distance values were checked for multivariate outliers. Both skewness and kurtosis values, and the Mahalanobis distance values, indicated the absence of univariate and multivariate outliers in the data. The multiple imputation technique was employed to handle missing data (Graham, 2012). Based on recommendations in the applied statistics literature, ten multiple imputed datasets were created to handle missing data, and all statistical analyses were conducted simultaneously on the ten multiple imputed datasets. Descriptive statistics were calculated and reported for all variables in this study. To answer the research questions, multiple regression analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 29.0 and the IEA IDB Analyzer Version 5.0. All continuous measures in this study were grand-mean-centered, and all dichotomous variables were kept in their original metric (Enders & Tofighi, 2007). Given the complexity of PISA sampling, the student sampling weight (W_FSTUWT) was used in all statistical analyses to compute correct parameter estimates and standard errors.

4. Results

The descriptive statistics for all the variables of interest in this study are presented in

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for variables of interest.

School Leadership Practices	M	SD
Collaborating with teachers to solve classroom discipline problems	3.68	1.04
Providing feedback to teachers based on observations of classroom instruction	3.92	0.88
Taking actions to support cooperation among teachers to develop new teaching practices	3.78	0.83
Taking actions to ensure that teachers take responsibility for improving their teaching skills	3.80	0.91
Taking actions to ensure that teachers feel responsible for their students’ learning outcomes	3.93	0.92
Providing parents or guardians with information about school and student performance	3.32	0.88
Working on a professional development plan for the school	2.92	0.94
Mathematics Dispositions	M	SD
Mathematics anxiety	0.14	1.20
Math self-efficacy and 21st-century skills	0.33	1.09
Formal and applied math self-efficacy	−0.27	1.28
Proactive mathematics study behavior	0.25	1.17
Performance in Mathematics	M	SD
Student mathematics scores	431.11	101.35

.

• RQ1—How well do school leadership practices predict students’ academic performance in mathematics?

The results from a multiple regression analysis, considering student gender and family SES, revealed that five out of the seven school leadership practices were statistically significant and negatively associated with students’ performance in mathematics (collaborating with teachers to solve classroom discipline problems [β = −0.09, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05]; providing feedback to teachers based on observations of instruction in the classroom [β = −0.05, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05]; taking actions to support cooperation among teachers to develop new teaching practices [β = −0.07, SE = 0.02, p < 0.05]; taking actions to ensure that teachers take responsibility for improving their teaching skills [β = −0.14, SE = 0.02, p < 0.05]; and providing parents or guardians with information on the school and student performance [β= −0.03, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05]), as presented in

Table 2. Results of multiple regression analysis predicting mathematics performance.

School Leadership Practices	β	SE	p
1. Collaborating with teachers to solve classroom discipline problems.	−0.09 *	0.01	<0.05
2. Providing feedback to teachers based on observations of classroom instruction.	−0.05 *	0.01	<0.05
3. Taking actions to support cooperation among teachers to develop new teaching practices.	−0.07 *	0.02	<0.05
4. Taking actions to ensure that teachers take responsibility for improving their teaching skills.	−0.14 *	0.02	<0.05
5. Taking actions to ensure that teachers feel responsible for their students’ learning outcomes.	0.20 *	0.01	<0.05
6. Providing parents or guardians with information about school and student performance.	−0.03 *	0.01	<0.05
7. Working on a professional development plan for the school.	0.08 *	0.01	<0.05

* p < 0.05.

. Put another way, students in schools whose school leaders frequently employed these leadership practices tended to score significantly lower on the PISA 2022 mathematics assessment than their peers whose school leaders rarely employed these practices.

The two school leadership practices, that is, taking actions to ensure that teachers feel responsible for their students’ learning outcomes (β = 0.20, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05) and working on a professional development plan for the school (β = 0.08, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05), were statistically significantly positively associated with student mathematics performances. In other words, students in schools where school leaders reported that their teachers frequently took actions to ensure that they felt responsible for their students’ learning outcomes tended to perform significantly better on the PISA 2022 mathematics assessment than their peers whose school leaders reported that their teachers rarely took actions to ensure that they felt responsible for their students learning outcomes. Likewise, students in schools where school leaders had a professional development plan for the school tended to score significantly higher on the PISA 2022 mathematics assessment than their counterparts whose school leaders did not have a professional development plan for the school.

• RQ2—How well do school leadership practices predict students’ academic dispositions in mathematics?

The results of multiple regression analysis (

Table 3. Results of multiple regression analysis predicting mathematics dispositions.

School Leadership Practices	Mathematics Anxiety			Mathematics Self-Efficacy						Proactive Mathematics Study Behavior
				Formal and Applied Mathematics			Mathematical Reasoning and 21st-Century Skills
	β	SE	p	β	SE	p	β	SE	p	β	SE	p
1. Collaborating with teachers to solve classroom discipline problems.	0.05 *	0.01	<0.05	−0.06 *	0.01	<0.05	−0.04 *	0.01	<0.05	−0.03 *	0.01	<0.05
2. Providing feedback to teachers based on observations of classroom instruction.	−0.01	0.01	>0.05	−0.01	0.01	>0.05	−0.02	0.01	>0.05	−0.01	0.01	>0.05
3. Taking actions to support cooperation among teachers to develop new teaching practices.	0.01	0.01	>0.05	0.00	0.01	>0.05	0.00	0.01	>0.05	0.00	0.02	>0.05
4. Taking actions to ensure that teachers take responsibility for improving their teaching skills.	0.02	0.01	>0.05	−0.07 *	0.02	<0.05	−0.04 *	0.02	<0.05	−0.02	0.01	>0.05
5. Taking actions to ensure that teachers feel responsible for their students’ learning outcomes.	−0.05 *	0.01	<0.05	0.09 *	0.01	<0.05	0.07 *	0.01	<0.05	0.05 *	0.01	<0.05
6. Providing parents or guardians with information about school and student performance.	0.00	0.01	>0.05	−0.01	0.01	>0.05	−0.01	0.01	>0.05	−0.03 *	0.01	<0.05
7. Working on a professional development plan for this school.	0.01	0.01	>0.05	0.02	0.01	>0.05	0.02 *	0.01	<0.05	0.03 *	0.01	<0.05

* p < 0.05.

), after accounting for student gender and family SES, suggested that students in schools where school leaders reported that their teachers frequently took actions to ensure that they felt responsible for their students’ learning outcomes exhibited significantly lower levels of mathematics anxiety (taking actions to ensure that teachers feel responsible for their students’ learning outcomes [β = −0.05, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05]); significantly higher levels of mathematics self-efficacy (formal and applied mathematics [β = 0.09, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05] and mathematical reasoning and 21st-century skills [β = 0.07, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05]); and proactive mathematics study behaviors (β = 0.05, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05). Students in schools where school leaders reported that they collaborated with teachers to solve classroom discipline problems tended to report significantly higher levels of mathematics anxiety (collaborating with teachers to solve classroom discipline problems [β = 0.05, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05]) and significantly lower levels of mathematics self-efficacy in formal and applied mathematics (β = −0.06, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05). Furthermore, students whose school leaders frequently took actions to ensure that teachers were responsible for improving their teaching skills exhibited significantly lower levels of mathematics self-efficacy in formal and applied mathematics (β = −0.07, SE = 0.02, p < 0.05).

5. Discussion

This study’s results illuminate the complex relationships between school leadership practices, students’ academic dispositions, and performance in mathematics on PISA 2022 in the UAE. This discussion draws upon these relationships and focuses on ramifications given the context of the UAE’s strategic educational goals and the literature on school leadership and student outcomes.

5.1. School Leadership Practices and Student Performance

This study’s results indicate that certain leadership behaviors are highly correlated with students’ achievement in mathematics. Furthermore, establishing a learning culture where teachers are responsible for students’ learning and ensuring appropriate professional training is linked with higher student outcomes. These results align with previous studies that have stressed that leadership is one of the most important factors affecting academic performance. For instance, V. M. J. Robinson et al. (2008) mentioned some of the advantages of setting goals and expectations, proper funding, and teacher development, as they are key factors leading to improved student performance. Similarly, Pont et al. (2008) discussed the importance of strategic decision-making and leadership in improving educational performance. Hattie (2009) and Day et al. (2016) also argued that enhancing teacher efficacy and development and setting goals and objectives are key leadership behaviors and critical in enhancing student performance. In the same manner, Leithwood et al. (2004, 2008, 2020), Leithwood and Jantzi (2005, 2008), and Harris and Muijs (2005) noted that leadership behaviors, such as developing a positive school climate, goal setting, promoting academic quality, and encouraging teacher professional development and professional learning communities, enhance pedagogical practices and student achievement.

When examined in the cultural and socio-historical context of the UAE, the findings of this study also take on a new meaning. The UAE is a nation with many expatriates and specific educational policy objectives that focus on integrating the best international practices with local values that are characterized by hierarchy and collaboration (Litz & Scott, 2017). Out of them, the most effective leadership behaviors in educational settings with linguistic and cultural diversity, where students and schools are supposed to meet high standards and where traditional values are well represented, are encouraging a positive, inclusive atmosphere and teacher professional development. Likewise, the emphasis on strategic resourcing and goal setting aligns with wider UAE policy objectives such as achieving excellence in international assessments like PISA.

However, in educational leadership, some practices that appear to be good for students may be harmful. For instance, in this study, strategies such as requiring teachers to be responsible for improving their teaching effectiveness, working with them to address problems in classroom management, offering feedback based on observations in the classroom, and assisting them in forming partnerships for new teaching strategies were detrimental to student performance in mathematics. This is, at first glance, a surprising result, and the first question that comes to mind is the effectiveness of the implementation and the context of these practices. One possible explanation is that if teachers are responsible for improving their performance when there is no adequate support in place, it may result in increased stress and pressure that could affect their teaching quality and the learning of students (Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012). Likewise, while feedback and cooperation are positive, their implementation may be counterproductive if they are used in the wrong way or if they interfere with the current classroom climate. In some instances, such initiatives can lead to confusion and teacher resistance that can impact student performance if not well planned for and implemented (Fullan, 2015). Moreover, while collaboration is recommended in theory, it may be problematic if it is not well coordinated and directed. Several issues may arise such as disruptions to the teaching and learning process if collaborative activities are directed toward the management of behavior and control rather than improving teaching methods (Hallinger & Heck, 1996, 1998).

These aforementioned issues are undoubtedly a reflection of shortcomings in school leadership approaches. Moreover, findings from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 highlight that on average across the OECD countries, about 33% of school principals underwent training in school leadership only after becoming a principal (OECD, 2019b). Furthermore, only a small share of principals participated in specific instructional leadership training as part of their formal education before becoming principals (OECD, 2019b). These results highlight the importance of formal training in developing the skills necessary for effective school leadership. Without such training, some principals may lack essential leadership, management, instructional, and ethical competencies. This deficiency can not only hinder their ability to collaborate with teachers, provide feedback, and foster cooperation among staff but also impede their effectiveness in leading and enhancing educational outcomes for students. These findings are consistent with the observation of several scholars in the context of the UAE such as Blaik Hourani and Stringer (2015a, 2015b), Litz and Scott (2017), Litz et al. (2020), Blaik Hourani et al. (2021, 2023), Amatullah and Litz (2022), and Rai and Beresford-Dey (2023) who noted a significant gap between formal educational policy and its implementation in practice in the UAE. Teachers reported a lack of agency, top-down and transactional practices, insufficient organizational support from school leadership, and other institutional constraints that ultimately hinder educational outcomes.

5.2. Contextual Factors and Equity Considerations

As mentioned previously, the UAE’s context is unique, characterized by a diverse student population and strong governmental emphasis on educational excellence as part of its national vision. Despite significant improvements in average scores and reductions in low-performing students, disparities persist, particularly between Emirati and expatriate students. Studies have revealed that expatriate students tend to outperform Emirati peers, a gap attributed to socioeconomic differences, language barriers, and access to resources (e.g., Gogliotti, 2020; Ibrahim & Alhosani, 2020; Marquez et al., 2022).

Leadership practices must therefore be sensitive to these contextual factors. For example, promoting inclusive and supportive learning environments, as suggested by Nasir and Cobb (2008), can help address cultural and socioeconomic disparities. School leaders must ensure that interventions are tailored to the needs of all student groups, particularly those from disadvantaged and marginalized backgrounds, to foster equity in educational outcomes. This perspective is also supported by a growing body of international literature (e.g., Dimmock & Walker, 2000, 2005; Thoonen et al., 2011; Oplatka & Arar, 2015; Hallinger, 2018; Noman et al., 2018; Litz et al., 2020; Gurr & Day, 2024) that has argued that as schools and educational systems have become increasingly complex and diverse, there is a need for more customized and nuanced educational models as well as integrated and contextual frameworks encompassing broader sets of leadership activities than those covered by earlier (i.e., transactional, transformational, and instructional) models. This is because traditional leadership models often lack the flexibility and depth required to effectively engage with the multifaceted realities of contemporary education. Integrated and contextual frameworks are important because they involve a wider range of leadership activities that include cultural, social, and technological aspects that affect learning environments. This helps educators to develop and put into place plans that are suitable for particular situations and contexts to improve the accessibility, fairness, and efficiency of the learning process for every student.

6. Conclusions

This research added to the body of knowledge on the impacts of leadership in schools on students’ achievement. To this end, using V. M. J. Robinson et al.’s (2008) five leadership dimensions as a framework, this study examined how various leadership behaviors impact the academic performance and learning strategies of students in the UAE context.

The results support the notion of context-specific leadership approaches, in agreement with studies on adaptive and culturally responsive leadership (e.g., Hallinger, 2018; Leithwood et al., 2004; Litz et al., 2020; V. M. J. Robinson et al., 2008). Leadership practices cannot be universal as they require customization to schools’ cultural, socioeconomic, and institutional contexts. Likewise, the focus on teacher accountability and professional development aligns with the broader literature on teacher development and student performance (Harris & Spillane, 2008). However, this study also cautions against over-emphasizing certain practices that may lead to heightened stress or lowered self-efficacy among students. Leadership strategies that are balanced and supportive and appropriate to the local context can have positive educational outcomes.

Furthermore, equity concerns are crucial in explaining the performance gaps between different categories of students, including Emirati and non-Emirati students. Future educational policies should aim at culturally sensitive teaching and more assistance for marginalized students as recommended by previous research (Nasir & Cobb, 2008; Marquez et al., 2022). Leadership practices should also be monitored regularly, and feedback should be provided on the effectiveness of the practices and whether any modifications are needed as the environment develops.

When performing a reflective analysis of these findings, the relationships between leadership practices, student dispositions, and academic performance deserve further inquiry. Longitudinal research could help reveal how specific leadership behaviors are learned in addition to how they impact educational outcomes over time. Complementing this, qualitative research could offer nuanced perspectives on how leadership practices are experienced and perceived by teachers and students, thereby uncovering the mechanisms underlying observed quantitative patterns. Additionally, to further understand the implications of these findings, future research should consider comparative studies across culturally similar countries and those significantly different from the UAE. Such studies could provide valuable insights into how leadership practices operate in diverse educational and cultural contexts, thereby offering a richer understanding of their global applicability.

Finally, the limitations of the PISA 2022 leadership items point to a broader challenge in capturing the multifaceted nature of school leadership. Future research should prioritize the development of comprehensive and contextually relevant leadership measures. Expanding the scope of such measures would provide richer insights into the interplay between leadership, teaching practices, and student performance, ultimately contributing to the refinement of principal training programs, educational policies, and leadership practices globally.

In conclusion, this study reinforces the vital role of adaptive, context-sensitive school leadership in shaping equitable and high-quality educational outcomes. By aligning effective leadership practices with local cultural and educational contexts, policymakers and educators can enhance both the academic performance and dispositions of students, paving the way for sustained improvements in educational systems.