Relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools of east Hararghe zone, Oromia national regional state, Ethiopia.

Relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools of east Hararghe zone, Oromia national regional state, Ethiopia. | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools of east Hararghe zone, Oromia national regional state, Ethiopia. Mulugeta Abera, Befekadu Zeleke, Million Kebede, Tadesse Hailu This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8378856/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 15 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. Correlational design of quantitative method was used to achieve this objective. From the total of 57 secondary schools in East Hararghe zone 24 schools were selected using stratified and simple random sampling techniques. A total of 420 sample respondents were selected using simple random sampling technique from East Hararghe zone secondary schools which were selected using stratified random sampling technique. The data were collected through a standardized principal instructional management rating scale for instructional leadership and a three-component for teachers commitment scale adopted by permission. The data were analyzed using descriptive such as mean, standard deviation and inferential statistics such as Pearson correlation. The findings revealed that teachers’ job satisfaction in East Hararghe zone secondary schools is at a moderate level. Similarly, teachers reported moderate level of their commitment. Furthermore, there is positive and strong relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. It is suggested that further cross-sectional studies be carried out in more zones, secondary schools and primary schools, including private ones using mixed method research and more data analysis tests. Government Secondary Schools Instructional leadership Teachers’ Commitment Figures Figure 1 1. Introduction The role of school principals, as instructional leaders, plays a crucial role in influencing the educational environment and shaping teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment are critical for delivering quality education to students and has been widely studied in educational research. This study examines the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction & commitment. The success of any organization depends on the quality of its leadership (Adan, 2025). Various leadership styles impact teachers’ attitudinal outcomes such as affective commitment, job satisfaction, employment engagement, and organizational commitment (Hoch et al., 2018). According to Khan & Gupta, (2025); Smith, (2025), the instructional leadership style is the most common that dramatically enhances teachers' job satisfaction and commitment compared to other leadership styles. In view of this, Gabion, (2025) noted that effective instructional leadership practices, such as promoting collaboration, providing constructive feedback, and supporting professional growth, create a more positive and fulfilling work environment, significantly impacts teacher job satisfaction & commitment. This was supported by Adan, (2025) study conducted in Somalia indicated that the leadership style of the principal significantly predicted teacher job satisfaction, conversely, teachers with high job satisfaction are more likely to exhibit stronger commitment to their work and the organization. In addition to instructional leadership, the foundation for a better-educated society is ultimately built upon teachers' devotion, flexibility, and commitment to students' development (Shiferaw & Ph, 2025). In many respects, teachers are essential to providing high-quality education (Abu, 2023). Teachers are crucial and fundamental players in enhancing school effectiveness because they have actual strength for producing quality students during teaching and learning practices (Ministry of Education, 2013). Ensuring high quality of teaching practice is a vital demand for academic achievement of students in schools (Kim & Lee, 2025). The quality of teaching practices can make a difference for the school success besides improving student learning. Since teaching practices are associated with various professional activities of teachers within schools, it is fundamental for the teachers to be committed within schools to pay full concentrations on improving student outcomes (Park, 2025). Moreover, the highly committed teachers are capable of improving student academic performance and transforming the schools into excellent schools (Syamil & Rahim, 2025). Therefore, further research needed on the relationship between instructional leadership styles, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. However, a few studies examined the relationship between instructional leadership styles and commitment & found that leadership styles teachers’ commitment have significant, positive & negative relationship, (for instance, Sucitra et al., (2024) revealed that leadership styles of principals and teachers commitment have a positive and statistically significant relationship. Yet, Khan et al. (2020) also found that effective instructional leadership enhances teachers’ commitment, which in turn positively impacts student outcomes. Cansoy et al. (2022) also noted that the behavior of school principals plays a crucial role in fostering teacher commitment. Instructional leadership styles of principals have a strong and significant relationship with teachers’ commitment. Globally, despite its critical role in achieving educational objectives, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment remains a significant challenge especially in developing countries such as Ethiopia and is an international problem affecting many schools (Ingersoll, 2020). High rates of teacher turnover, low morale, and declining instructional effectiveness undermine school continue to performance and educational quality (Quiroz, 2021; Alemu, 2024; Kumar, 2024). Various studies across the globe have shockingly revealed a very low level of teacher job satisfaction. In a UNESCO’s study conducted across the globe, only 8.6% of the teachers were satisfied while 58.1% wanted to quit teaching (Muga, 2022). In developed countries especially in USA, 50% of secondary school teachers were not satisfied 25% intending to quit within a year due to poor working conditions (Mugazi, 2022). In developing nations the situation is grave with a survey on the majority of education unions (60 %) of teachers in Africa revealed that attrition rate of primary teachers was 44% which created serious shortages of teachers (Sahabi, 2022). Moreover, recent empirical studies conducted within Ethiopian schools underscore the direct link between school leadership and teachers’ commitment. Research by Bekalu and colleagues found that a positive correlation between school leadership styles and teachers’ commitment (Bekalu et al.,, 2016). According to Fenot (2005) as cited in Bekalu et al., (2016), noted that in primary schools nearly two-thirds of teachers (64.7%) have tentative or definite plan to leave the profession, 50 % of these indicated that they will continue teaching until they get another job, 14.2% stated they definitely plan to leave teaching, less than 23.3% intend to remain in the profession until retirement. Despite the recognized importance of school principals’ instructional leadership, many government secondary schools context in Ethiopia face challenges related to teacher dissatisfaction and low commitment levels. Issues such as inadequate leadership support, poor working conditions, and limited career growth opportunities contribute to teacher attrition, negatively impacting student learning. Addressing these gaps is vital for contextualizing global insights and refining Ethiopia’s education policies. Therefore, the researcher is highly motivated to address this knowledge, methodological and contextual research gap by examining the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment in secondary schools of East Hararghe zone. The problem formulation of this study is as follows. Research Questions What is the current status of instructional leadership style used by principals of secondary schools in East Hararghe Zone? What is the current status of teachers’ commitment in the secondary schools of East Hararghe Zone? Are there statistically significant relationships between instructional leadership styles, teachers’ commitment in secondary schools of East Hararghe Zone? 2. Literature review Instructional leadership While there is no single standard definition for the term instructional leadership, scholars have attempted to define it in diverse ways since 1980s. Hoy (2008) stated that instructional leadership is when a school principal oversees curriculum and instruction. This term originated from studies related to the 1980s effective school movement, which found that the role of principals is crucial to the operation of successful schools (Gumus et al., 2021). Noor and Nawab (2022) stated that “instructional leadership is a complex process, which differs across settings, based on individual style, school context, and constituents”. Moreover, Shaked, (2024) have explained the concept of instructional leadership refers to a school leadership approach that emphasizes the principal’s responsibility for improving the quality of teaching and learning. The principal or other school leader actively shapes curriculum development, instructional strategies, and teacher professional development (Hallinger et al., 2015). Munna (2023)Jalidar and Alias (2024) concluded that instructional leadership is a set of behaviors that are taught with a clear purpose to influence, guide, teach, and give encouragement to teachers in an effort to improve and complete programs related to the learning process of students, with the goal achieve each set school objective . Additionally, they promote a collaborative environment where teachers are inspired to grow and improve their skills (Chayomchai, 2024). Because they place a high priority on student achievement and foster an environment of excellence, instructional leaders play a crucial role in fostering educational success. Organizational Commitment Organizational commitment has been defined differently by different scholars (Allen and Meyer, 1990). Early studies relate organizational commitment with attitudinal or behavioral conceptualizations (Allen and Meyer, 1990). There are many definitions of organizational commitment as developed by researchers with respect to their areas of interest (Rotimi, 2019). For instance, Syabarrudin et al., (2020) and Neziri (2021) view organizational commitment as employees’ orientation towards their organization with respect to their loyalty, identification and involvement in organizational system and activities. Organizational commitment can be defined as the extent to which an employee will experience a sense of community with their organization (Nazim et al., 2023). Organizational commitment is also a condition of employees who side with certain organizations and their goals, as well as the intention to maintain their membership in the company (Purnomo et al., 2020). In other words, organizational commitment will be related to the high desire of employees to share and sacrifice for the company. In similar vein, Khan et al., (2020) opine that organizational commitment is the degree to which an employee willingly maintains his or her membership in an organization and the acceptance of organization’s goals and values. For the purpose of this study, organizational commitment is defined as the extent or degree of teacher’s alignment and complete acceptance of schools goals and values, which culminated in his or her persistent loyalty, identification and involvement in school activities. Meyer et al., (1993) explain the varying antecedents for each dimension. A precursor to affective commitment is work experiences that encourage an employee to feel comfortable and competent. Normative commitment is preceded by feelings of loyalty learned through the individual’s experiences of familial, cultural, and organizational socialization. An antecedent of continuance commitment is the individual’s realization of the costs of leaving the organization and determining them to be too great. Personal characteristics are also antecedents of the three dimensions of commitment (Meyer et al., 1993). Affective commitment (Emotional): refers to the employees’ identification with, involvement in, and sentimental attachment to their organizations (Allen and Meyer, 1990). According to Zamani et al., (2024) it also conveys the extent to which employees become psychologically attached with the organizations through various feelings (e.g., loyalty, affection, warmth, belongingness, fondness, happiness, and pleasure. In the context of teachers, this could relate to the passion they will develop for teaching and the emotional connection they will build with the institution they will work for (Thien and Adams, 2021). Continuance commitment: has to do with the degree to which employee perceives the associated cost of leaving the organization for another (Meyer et al., 2002a). Employees in this category are not willing to lose membership of their organization because of the economic and social importance attached such as losing relationship with old time friends & colleagues; forfeiting accrued salaries, pension benefits and promotion. For teachers, this will involve factors such as the financial implications of switching careers or the challenges of securing a new teaching position (Aslan, 2022). Normative commitment: is the employees’ sense of loyalty or obligation to remain with their organization irrespective of the circumstance whether good or bad. Employees in this category might find it difficult to leave their organization even if they are no longer comfortable with job role (Kaya et al., 2024). This occurs mostly when the organization has invested in an employee through quality training while such employee are equally willing to reciprocate by staying or remaining with their organization overtime (Bashir and Gani, 2020). Understanding how these components will operate within the educational field will help secondary schools identify the causes of low retention among teachers and devise effective solutions to address these challenges (Neziri, 2021). The three dimensions share the correlates of job satisfaction, job involvement, and occupational commitment. These variables are considered correlates because there is not sufficient evidence to claim a causal relationship. Job satisfaction, job involvement, and occupational commitment have an “affective” tone, but they can be distinguished from affective commitment and are considered correlates of organizational commitment in general (Meyer et al., 2002). Instructional leadership and Teacher organizational Commitment Principal’s leadership style plays significant role in the smooth running of educational system. Its role cannot be denied in enhancing teacher’s commitment (Saleem, 2017). Relationship between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment has been explored in many research studies globally and locally with their direct and indirect impact on each other. Globally, in USA, Skelton (2019) found that (a) teachers rated principals highest on the instructional leadership function of framing & communicating school goals, (b) teachers reported greater levels of organizational commitment when principals communicated school goals & (c) years of teaching experience, school context, school size, or grade level teaching did not affect teachers commitment. In China, Zhan et al., (2023) found that principals’ instructional leadership has direct effect on teacher retention & indirect effects: through the separate mediating role of role stress, the separate mediating role of affective commitment & the chain-mediating role of affective commitment. In Turkey, Cansoy et al., (2022) conducted a research study in Turkey that examined the relationship between school principals’ instructional leadership styles with teacher’s organizational commitment found that significant relationship between instructional leadership and teachers’ commitment. Similarly, Kiral & Suçi̇çeği̇, (2017) conducted research in Turkish context and investigated the way by which principals’ instructional leadership behaviors influence teachers’ organizational commitment in schools found a significant positive correlation between these two instructional leadership practices and teachers commitment. In Indonesia, a comprehensive examination of the impact of instructional leadership provided by school principals on teacher commitment by Sucitra et al., (2024) found that instructional leadership style of school principals and the resulting organizational commitment has a positive and statistically significant, effect on teacher organizational commitment. Similarly, Harahap and Suriansyah (2019), Nellitawati et al., (2024) found that the principal's instructional leadership contributed 7.8% to improving teacher performance, while work commitment contributed 22.5%. When these two variables were combined, they explained 23.1% of the variability in teacher performance & instructional leadership & high work commitment in improving teacher performance. Yet, Habibi, (2025) conducted a study that explored the impact of instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, professional commitment and school climate on job satisfaction and performance among Indonesian secondary teachers. The findings revealed that teacher self-efficacy significantly enhanced commitment and the school climate, with the most substantial relationships observed in this study. In India Nanjundeswaraswamy (2023)identified the association between leadership styles & commitment mediated by job satisfaction in India found that job satisfaction partially mediates the relationship between leadership styles & employee commitment. In Pakistan Saleem, (2017) study relationship between principals’ leadership styles & teachers’ commitment found that there was significantly & positively moderate relationship between principal’s leadership styles & teachers’ commitment. In the African context, numerous studies have explored the relationship between leadership styles & employee commitment. In Nigeria, Oyewobi (2022) explored the relationship between three primary constructs: leadership styles & organizational commitment among private-practice found a positive indirect link between leadership styles and organizational commitments, In Tanzania, Nyenyembe et al., (2016) investigated the influence of leadership style, and job satisfaction on organizational commitment found that leadership styles is the predictor of organizational commitment with 49.7% variance is explained; while with job performance, 34.8% of variance explained. Similarly, Mgaiwa (2023) found that perceived leadership styles statistically significantly related to academics’ staff commitment & above their marital status, gender, age & institutional type. In Uganda Bratnicka (2015) investigated the effect of principals’ leadership styles on the commitment of teachers found that democratic, autocratic & laissez-faire had a positive & significant influence on commitment of teachers. In Ethiopia, Tekle and Solomon (2016) investigated the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment in terms of academic staff at Arba Minch University found that, employees were fund to be most satisfied the relationship that they have with their coworkers, nature of the work & communication & lest satisfied with pay they receive & promotion; and they enjoy average level of overall job satisfaction. Similarly, Getahun (2022) examined the relationship between leadership styles of principals, and teachers’ commitment found that, democratic style has inverse relation with affective commitment, but laissez-faire showed positive relation with affective commitment, while autocratic leadership showed no relationship with affective commitment. However, both democratic & autocratic showed positive relation with normative & continuance commitment of teachers; but laissez-faire has no relation on continuance but inverse relation with normative commitment. Mesfin (2023) examined the perceived relationship between principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ commitment in Ethiopia found that the transactional leadership style was predominantly practiced in Ethiopian secondary schools & transactional & transformational leadership styles had positive & statistically significant relationships with teachers’ commitment. Laissez-faire leadership style was found to be negatively related to teachers’ normative commitment. Geda (2015) examine the impact of secondary school principals leadership behavior on teachers commitment in Adama city administration of Oromia region, Ethiopia found a significantly positive correlation between leadership styles and teachers commitment, he also noted that almost all school principals were from non-management or leadership educational background, they lack knowhow on how to influence and get teachers to perform beyond expectation, develop sense of school citizenship and work for unifying purpose. Dea Lerra, (2021) assessed the link and effect of leadership style on teachers' commitment in secondary schools in Wolaita Zone, SNNPR, Ethiopia, revealed that there was positive correlation between transformational leadership and teachers' commitment. Tigist et al., (2023) explored the link between school principals’ transformational leadership style to teachers’ organizational commitment in Addis Ababa government secondary schools found that transformational leadership is less practiced in Addis Ababa government secondary schools. The study further reveals that transformational leadership is positively and significantly related to teachers’ organizational commitment. As clearly mentioned above, instructional leadership style of principals has a significant impact on teachers’ commitment to their school. Thus, secondary school principals should use the right leadership techniques to encourage teachers to be committed to their school, students and teaching profession. As clearly mentioned above, worldwide research has shown that instructional leadership style of principals has meaningfully a significant correlation with teachers’ commitment to their school (e.g., Abdullah et al., 2018; Skelton 2019; Hallinger & Hosseingholizadeh, 2018; Tahir & Noor Fatima, 2023; Sucitra et al., 2024); . However, this relationship remains unexplored in the context of secondary schools in east Hararghe zone, Oromia, Ethiopia. To address this gap, the present study aims to investigate the potential link between instructional leadership and teachers’ organizational commitment in east Hararghe zone secondary schools, Conceptual Framework of the Study Adom et al., (2018), define the conceptual framework as a visual or written product that explains in the form of a narration; graph of what is to be studied as the main factor. Leshem & Trafford, (2007) offer that conceptual frameworks serve the purpose of providing theoretical amplification of what the study wants to investigate and allow readers understand the objectives of the research and how these will be achieved. This Conceptual framework was developed based on literature and findings from different researchers. It was mainly based on Bass & Riggio, (2005) and others’ writings that leadership style influences organizational commitment. In view of the above study, the self-made model was constructed to explain the relationship among leadership style, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. It is divided into independent and dependent variables: independent variable is instructional leadership style whereas the dependent variables teachers’ commitment dimensions (affective, continuance and normative) as shown in figure 1 below. The model shows that three dimensions of instructional leadership styles are related to teacher’s organizational commitment facets. It is assumed that each of the three dimensions of instructional leadership (defining the school mission, managing the instructional programs and promoting a positive school learning climate) relates to the three (affective, normative and continuance commitment) of teachers commitment facets. 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 3.1. Research Design Research design can be regarded as the general plan for conducting a research, which is the procedure involved in data collection, analysis and report writing (Creswell, 2009). It refers to the procedural framework within which the research is conducted (Jilcha, 2019). Research design is characterized by procedures and methods for arriving at results and findings and tools for proving or disproving such, knowledge (Patel & Patel, 2019). Gardner (2018) three categories of quantitative research design include descriptive, correlational, and causal. This study adopted a correlational research design. In a correlational research design, data is gathered from study participants at a particular point in time to provide a snapshot of the current conditions in regard to the studied variable (Kato, 2023). In this study, data from teachers and principals were collected at once with the aid of questionnaire as a data collection instrument. Further, correlational research design was chosen because it permitted data collection utilizing a self-administered questionnaire that enabled the researcher to reach a sizable number of teachers (Gardner, 2018). It also aided the acquisition of useful data in a relatively short period thus, saving time and cost to have the study accomplished. A correlational research design refers to a quantitative research where two or more quantitative variables are related to determine if there is a relationship between them (Kato, 2023). Utilizing this type of a research design, relationships between and among a number of variables is sought and interpreted (Creswell, 2009)). Thus, using a correlational research design, relationships between leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment were established (Welch, 2011). The quantitative research approach was used for this investigation. In a quantitative research approach, numerical data was utilized and analyzed using statistical methods to address the research question that was examined (Park et al. 2020). The research used this approach because the data collected using the main questionnaire was quantitative which was analyzed using statistics. The study collected quantitative data that was numerically analyzed with statistical procedures to make generalization. The statistical procedures used to analyses data were descriptive and inferential statistics. This helped to draw inferences on the variables under study. The quantitative research approach was adopted because the study was guided by the positivist research philosophy which aimed at establishing the objective reality in relation to the study variables. Population, Sample, and Sampling Techniques A population which is made of individuals with shared identifiable features Creswell, (2014), this research focused on the 54 government secondary schools in the East Hararghe Zone, which have a student population of 2258 teachers and 132 principals as of 2025 in the Oromia Regional State. According to Okwisa (2023) a sample is a set of relatively smaller number of individuals selected from a population for research purposes. According to Bhalerao and Kadam (2010) a sample size is basically the number of participants or individuals in a sample. The current study was employed three sampling techniques, namely: stratified, purposive and simple random sampling techniques. Firstly, the researcher was used stratified sampling technique to categorize government secondary schools in East Hararghe zone into two (2) sub-groups (pastoral and non-pastoral) to make the schools more homogeneous, and this stratified sampling may results in more reliable and detailed information based on the size of their staff, geographical location and economic status. According to Creswell (2014) stratified sampling involves dividing the total population into subgroups or strata based on common characteristics. The study uses stratified sampling technique because it enable the researcher to ensure that each stratum of the target population will proportionately represent in the sample for the study (Akpan et al., 2023). After the stratification, the researcher was used Yamane et al., (1967) and Cochran, (1977) correction formula assuming 95% confidence level, for determining representative sample size from each stratum. As calculated by Yamane et al., (1967) and Cochran, (1977) correction formula, from the first stratum 4 sample secondary schools and from the second stratum 20 sample secondary schools were sampled. Secondly, the 24 sample secondary schools were selected using simple random sampling technique. To select teachers from 24 sample secondary schools, the researcher was also used simple random sampling technique from each stratum (4 from pastoral and 20 from non-pastoral) secondary schools and 358 teachers (69 from pastoral and 289 from non-pastoral) , resulting in a total of 358 teachers to participate in the study. Finally, the researcher was used purposive sampling technique to select principals from the sampled secondary schools. Therefore, in the sampled secondary schools, there are 62 principals. Since they are manageable size the researcher was included all principals using purposive sampling technique. Data Collection Tools A quantitative research approach using a correlation design was used to examine the relationship between variables in order to adequately answer the fundamental questions (Y. Cohen et al., 2018). In order to gather pertinent information regarding instructional leadership styles and teachers' commitment secondary school, principals and teachers were chosen as the main data source. For the current quantitative research, the researchers were used two sets closed-ended questionnaire as the main data gathering tool to collect data from the total of 420 respondents. This instrument is fit for this purpose Cohen et al, (2007) as the study was followed the quantitative research approach. The first part consists of fifty-items, divided under the three sub-variables to measure school principals as an independent variable adapted by permission from Hallinger and Murphy, (1985). The second part of the questionnaire was adapted by permission from the 18-item scale developed by Meyer and Allen (2004) to measure teachers commitment. Questionnaires were distributed to 420 respondents (358 teachers and 62 school principals). The first questionnaire the researchers used was Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale PIMRS to measure school principal’s leadership style. The PIMRS Teacher-Form and principal-form questionnaire is consists of 50 items within its three dimensions of ten functions (Hallinger, 2015 and Al-Mahdy et al., 2018), established and validated by Hallinger and Murphy, (1985) to evaluate instructional leadership practices of school principals. PIMRS measures leadership behaviors focused on improving teaching, learning, and school climate as it is identified as a validated and commonly used instrument. More than 200 studies spanning 26 countries (Hallinger & Lee, 2013) have used this scale and acknowledged it a leading model to evaluate how principals set educational goals and institutional environments (Hallinger et al., 2015: Imran et al., 2025). This instrument has also been used by OECD to assess principals’ effectiveness (Bellibaş, 2016). In the current study, data was collected using a 5-point Likert scale. Item response categories ranged from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). The instrument was scored by calculating the mean for the items that comprises each subscale and this resulted in a profile that portrays perceptions of principal and teachers on each instructional leadership function, it was validated by developer and previous researchers, Hallinger and Murphy (1985) reported that the PIMRS questionnaire was a valid for measuring principal instructional leadership, Imran et al., (2025) found high internal reliability, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.979 of the instrument. permission to use the instrument was obtained from the original authors, (PIMRS) website (Hallinger and Murphy, 1985). It was used for research question number 1. The second questionnaire used to collect data on teachers’ organizational commitment variables was developed by Meyer and Allen (Meyer & Allen, 1991). For this study the researcher was used the revised version 18-item TCM commitment survey questionnaire. The TCM scale includes six items for each subscale, generating a composite score based on 18 items (6 for measuring each dimension: affective, normative, and continuance) developed by Allen and Meyer (1990) Meyer et al., (1993) and Meyer and Allen (2004), with modification to suit the purpose and content of the study, permission to use the instrument was obtained from the original authors, the TCM employee commitment website.. The survey scale was rated in a 5-point Likert agreement scale, where “1” represents “strongly disagree & “5” for “strongly agree.” The reliability of the TCM as estimated by Meyer and Allen (1990), reported a reliability (alpha) of 0.87 for affective, 0.75 for continuance, 0.79 for normative, and 0.80 for the reliability of the total commitment scale. Similarly, Emiru and Gedifew (2024) were found 0.79, 0.73 and 0.85 for continuance, normative & affective subscales. Recently, a similar questionnaire was also used in the Ethiopian context by Tigist, (2024) for the same purpose and tested the reliability of the instrument found the alpha coefficients of three components were found: (0.87) for affective commitment, (0.75) for continuance commitment, and (0.79) for normative commitment found it reliable and valid. All these alpha value measures were acceptable to use for the study. This is because Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) as cited in Dawit and Endris (2019) clearly indicated that a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.70 and above is an acceptable level of internal consistency used for research question number 3. Since all of these questionnaires originally in English, while the respondents of this study are also more comfortable with English language, the researcher was used the original questionnaire as it is. In addition to the primary survey questions, there are demographic items asking respondents about their position (for leaders), age, gender, working experience, education level, and school. This information helped researchers to understand the respondents’ backgrounds. The researchers considered relevant ethical considerations such as explaining the objectives and significance of the study to obtain consent from selected respondents, encouraging them to participate voluntarily, and ensuring confidentiality by making sure that any information they provide is used primarily for the study. Data Analysis First of all, the researcher was checked the collected data through data cleaning of the filled questionnaire to identify valid responses and to remove the invalid ones. Data collected from respondents were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential data analysis. Descriptive statistics include frequencies, measure of standard deviation, measures of central tendency (means, modes, and medians), cross tabulations and standardized scores (Y. Cohen et al., 2018). In this study, descriptive data includes frequencies, percentages, mean, and standard deviation. Descriptive data will be (a) age (b) gender and (c) year of study and the current status of instructional leadership style, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. Descriptive statistics is conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 to perform means and standard deviations along with reliability statistics for sub-constructs of instructional leadership (creating a school mission, managing the instructional program, and developing a positive school learning climate); teachers’ job satisfaction (intrinsic, and extrinsic) and teacher commitment (affective, continuance and normative) were calculated and reported for research question 1 and 2. Among the inferential statistics the Pearson-r correlation coefficient was employed to examine the relationship between the variables in secondary schools for basic questions 4. Pearson-r correlation coefficient was employed to examine the existence, strength, and direction of the relationship between instructional leadership styles, teachers’ job satisfaction, and commitment sub-variables (facets). The coefficient of correlation tells us about the relations between two variables and there are three levels of correlations between the variables. It is said to have a range that is between -1 to +1, with + 1 showing a perfect positive correlation, while -1 reflects a perfectly negative one, and finally a value of zero is said not to exist any correlation at all. The sign which could either be negative or positive is an indicator of the direction of change within the variable relationships. Classifications of magnitude of correlation interpretation like: less than 0.35 shows a weak relationship exists; between 0.35 and 0.65 moderate level relationship and from 0.65 to 1.00 indicates a strong relationship exists (Y. Cohen et al., 2018). Therefore for the purpose of this study this standard was used as reference. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 is used to examine the values of Pearson correlation for sub-constructions of instructional leadership, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. Previous researchers such as Donald, (2016), Beevor, (2023), Shaari et al., (2022), Ardo et al., (2024), Marie et al., (2025), were utilized this method, and locally in an Ethiopian setting. Burichaw et al., (2016), Tekle & Solomon, (2016), used Pearson r to analyze the data on the local context, and Endale, (2019), Lima et al., (2021) also used the mean and correlation to analyze the data. Besides, inferential statistics were employed, such as linear and multiple regression analysis to see which independent variable predicted the dependent variable and the link between the outcome variable and one or more predictors. This analysis shows not only the relationship between variables but also the degree to which the link occurred and determines which independent variable predicts the dependent variable. The linear regression is used to see the link between one independent variable and one dependent variable, for instance, to see the influence of leadership style on job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Gay et al., 2012). The multiple regressions were used to analyze one dependent variable and multiple independent variables. For instance, the influence of three instructional leadership style dimensions on teachers’ job satisfaction as well as organizational commitment to support one of the current basic research questions 4. In this study, multiple linear regressions were employed to support one of the current research question that attempts to examine how the independent variable (instructional leadership to predict teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment were statistically estimated. The adjusted R² values were examined to indicate the percentage of variances in teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment explained by instructional leadership. This was used for research question number 3. 4. RESULTS Descriptive Statistics Results Descriptive statistics are used to describe the basic features of the data in a study. Creswell (2014) asserts that, descriptive statistics provide simple summaries about the sample and the measures through mean, standard deviation, mode and median. Furthermore, together with simple graphics analysis, they form the basis of virtually every quantitative analysis of data. This study used descriptive statistics to present the mean and standard deviation of the gathered data on the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment in government secondary schools of East Hararghe zone. The study adopted a likert scale of 1-5 (1=strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral,4=Agree,5=Strongly Agree). The key variables rated by respondents included; instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. The broad objective of the study was to examine the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment of government secondary schools in East Hararghe zone. The style of school principals was tested by analyzing the relationship between each instructional leadership dimensions, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment using quantitative analysis of data for the three instructional leadership dimensions; defining school mission, managing instructional program and developing positive school learning climate. Background characteristics of respondents This section presents demographic information of the respondents who participated in the study. The information included number of years teachers had served under the current head teacher and years of experience as trained teachers. This was to help the researcher ascertain whether the respondents had adequate knowledge of the head teacher’s leadership practices and to determine the extent to which their responses could be relied upon to make conclusions on the study problem. Accordingly, 420 questionnaires were distributed for secondary school teachers and principals out which 368 (87.6 %) were properly filled. On the other hand, 50 questionnaires were not returned, returned while not fully filled or returned completely blank. This represented a non-response rate of 11.9%. According to Kubai, (2023) a response rate of 50% is adequate, 60% good while 70% response rate is very good. This implies that the 87.6% response rate obtained in this study is adequate for analysis and making conclusions and recommendations of the study. In general, from the total distributed questionnaire 420, 368 (87.6%) of them were entered and analyzed using SPSS software. As shown in Table 1, the majority of principals were male (96.8%), the percentage of female principals was (3.2%). Similarly majority of teachers were male (90.2%), the percentage of female teachers was (9.8%). This shows that a significant gender disparity existed, with a much higher proportion of male and female school principals. Table 1 : Frequency of Teachers and Principal According to their Gender Gender Teachers Principals Frequency Percent Frequency percent Valid male 276 90.2 60 96.8 female 30 9.8 2 3.2 Total 306 100.0 62 100.0 Table 2 presents results of teachers and principals’ frequency according to demographic characteristics of age. It is evident from the table that most of the teachers, 112 (36.6%) were between the ages of 26 to 30 years, 78 (25.5%) of them aged 31-35, 50 (16.3%) of them aged 36-40 years, 28 (9.2%) of them aged 20-25 and 38 (12.4%) of them were aged above 40 years. Similarly the largest percentage of secondary school principals 28 (45.2%) were between the ages of 26 to 30, 26 (41.9%) principals were between 31-35 and 6 (9.7%) of principals were between 20-25 20 years age group. Table 2 : Frequency of teachers and principal according to their age Teachers Principals Total Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Valid 20-25 28 9.2 6 9.7 34 9.3 26-30 112 36.6 28 45.2 140 38.0 31-35 78 25.5 26 41.9 104 28.3 36-40 50 16.3 2 3.2 52 14.0 above 40 38 12.4 0 0 38 10.4 Total 306 100.0 62 100.0 368 100.0 Table 3 represents result of teachers and principals’ distribution according to their teaching and administrative experience. Result shows that the largest percentage of secondary school teachers 76 (24.8%) reported they had more between 11 to 15 years of teaching experience. That percentage was closely followed by those teachers with above twenty of classroom teaching experience 70 (22.9%) years of experience 66 (21.6%) reported they had more between 16 to 20 years of teaching experience. Similarly the largest percentage of secondary school principals 28 (45.2%) reported they had 5 to 10 years of administrative experience. 26 (41.9) principals had 11 to 15 administrative experience. Table 3 Frequency of Teachers and Principal According to their Working experience Teachers Principals Total Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Valid below 5 40 13.1 2 3.2 42 11.4 5-10 54 17.6 28 45.2 82 22.3 11-15 76 24.8 26 41.9 102 27.7 16-20 66 21.6 6 9.7 72 19.6 above 20 70 22.9 0 0 70 19.0 Total 306 100.0 62 100.0 368 100.0 As indicated in Table 4, regarding educational qualification most of the teachers, 258 (84.3%) were degree holders. 48 (15.7%) of them have above first degree. Similarly the largest percentage of secondary school principals 56 (903%) were degree holders, 6 (9.7%) of them have above first degree. This might indicate that most of the teachers and principals are qualified to the level they are engaged as professionals and can provide adequate information to the research work. Table 4 : Frequency of Teachers and Principal According to their Educational qualification Teachers Principals Total Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Valid Degree 258 84.3 56 90.3 314 95.3 above degree 48 15.7 6 9.7 54 14.7 Total 306 100.0 62 100.0 368 100.0 Self-reported Result of school principals on their leadership style Table 5: Descriptive Statistics of Principals’ Perceptions of their Instructional Leadership Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum M SD Framing the school goal 62 1.00 5.00 3.38 1.32 Communication the school goal 62 1.00 5.00 3.66 1.22 Defining the school mission 124 3.52 1.27 Supervises and evaluates instruction 62 1.00 5.00 3.66 1.32 Coordinates the curriculum 62 1.00 5.00 2.67 1.17 Monitor students’ progress 62 1.00 5.00 3.12 1.29 Managing instructional program 186 3.15 1.26 Protects instructional time 62 1.00 5.00 2.89 1.43 Maintains high visibility 62 1.00 5.00 3.02 1.35 Provides incentives for teachers 62 1.00 5.00 3.63 1.01 Promotes professional development 62 1.00 5.00 3.74 1.02 Provides incentives for learning 62 1.00 5.00 2.42 1.18 Developing positive school learning climate 310 3.14 1.20 Overall Mean 620 3.27 1.24 Note: N (list wise) = 62 Table 5 represents the descriptive statistics of Principals’ Perceptions of their Instructional Leadership. The means for principal responses ranged from a high of (M=3.74, SD=0.51) on the instructional leadership function of “Promotes professional development,” to a low of (M=2.42, SD=0.51) on the leadership function of “Provides incentives for learning.” The mean for both leadership dimensions of “defining the school mission” was the largest at (M=3.52, SD=0.51) which included framing the school goals and communicating school goals. The function of “framing the school goal” had a mean of (M=3.38, SD=1.32), and the function of “communicates the school goals” had a mean of (M=3.66, SD=1.22). On the dimension of “Managing instructional program,” two means were above 3.00, Supervises and evaluates instruction, (M=3.66, SD=1.32), and Monitoring students’ progress, (M=3.12, SD=1.29). Only one mean was below 3.00, and was on the instructional leadership functions of “coordinating the curriculum” (M=2.67, SD=1.17). The instructional leadership dimension of “developing positive school learning climate” had the lowest mean of (M=3.14, SD=1.26). On the dimension of “developing the school program and learning climate,” three functions score a mean above (M=3.00), promotes professional development (M=3.74, SD=1.02) providing incentives for teachers (M=3.63, SD=1.01) and maintaining high visibility (M=3.02, SD=1.35). The other two functions score a mean below (M=3.00), protecting instructional time (M=2.89, SD=1.43) and providing incentives for learning (M=2.42, SD=1.18), but above the average mean score of a 5-point likert scale. It should be noted that the instructional leadership dimensions of “defining the school mission” had a total mean of (M=3.52, SD=1.27), which was the highest mean of the three instructional leadership dimensions followed by managing instructional program (M=3.15, SD=1.26) and developing positive school learning climate is the dimension with the lowest mean score among the three dimensions (M=3.14, SD=1.24). Overall, the teachers’ ratings of principal instructional leadership practices ranged from 2.42 to 3.74, indicating relatively high perceptions across all dimensions. The statistical findings further indicated that the principal’s practices in promoting professional development (M = 3.74, SD = 1.02), communication the school goal (M = 3.66, SD = 1.22), supervising and evaluating instruction (M = 3.66, SD = 1.32), and providing incentives for teachers (M = 3.63, SD = 1.01) received the highest mean ratings among the ten instructional leadership functions evaluated. This result is also in line with a study conducted by These results align with the findings of Hallinger and Lee, (2014), Yasser et al., (2015), Kemal, (2016) Harris et al., (2019), Binti Si-Rajab et al., (2019), Simin Ghavifekr et al., (2019), Bada et al., (2020), and Latif, (2021), Sultan et al., (2022), Thien et al., (2023) which indicated that the mean score of defining school mission had the highest of the three instructional leadership dimensions followed by the mean score of managing instructional program and developing a positive school learning climate had the lowest mean score of the three dimensions. However, contrasting results were noted in the study by Ping and Mohd Hamzah, (2021), Sultan et al., (2022), Jeannette et al., (2023), Gechere et al., (2025), and Tran, (2025), which indicated that the mean score for developing a positive school learning climate had the highest mean score followed by managing instructional program and defining school mission had the lowest mean score of the three instructional leadership dimensions, and the results of the study by Legesse, (2025) which indicated that the mean score for managing instructional program had the highest mean score followed by defining school mission and developing a positive school learning climate had the lowest mean score of the three commitment dimension. Self-reported Result of teachers on their commitment Table 6: Descriptive Statistics of Teachers’ Perceptions of their commitment Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Affective teachers commitment 306 1.00 5.00 3.85 0.95 Continuance teachers commitment 306 1.00 5.00 2.94 1.25 Normative teachers commitment 306 1.00 5.00 3.27 1.08 Overall 306 3.35 1.09 Note: N (list wise) = 306 Table 6 represents the descriptive statistics for teachers’ commitment measured by the Three-Component Model (TCM) of teachers’ commitment. The mean and standard deviation values for each dimension in Table 6 showed that the extent of teachers organizational commitment. This data shows how teachers perception about three aspects of teachers commitment. The three dimensions of teachers’ commitment, concerning the mean score and SD for Affective commitment were 3.85 and 0.95, indicating that the teachers generally believes their Affective commitment to the school to be slightly higher than the average. Affective commitment refers to an individual's desired based connection and sense of belonging to the school. Teachers have some degrees of affective commitment compared to others. The mean score and standard deviation indicated for the teacher's normative commitment were 3.27 and 1.08, respectively, shows that teachers generally believe their normative commitment to be slightly higher than the average. Thus, the teachers have high level of commitment in secondary schools. From the three dimensions of teachers’ commitment, affective commitment shows relative highest mean scores than others. Affective commitment is characterized by a desire-based commitment to the organization. Regarding the mean score and SD of continuance commitment were 2.94 and 1.25, respectively. Continuance commitment refers to the expenses or sacrifices involved in resigning from the school. Teachers may experience perceived costs or sacrifices while leaving the organization, such as a loss of benefits or seniority. Teachers’ commitment is a combination of affective, normative, and continuance commitment. However, this shows that there were high levels of teachers in secondary schools. The results indicated that, affective commitment had the highest mean score (3.894). Affective commitment involves employee engagement with the organization on an emotional level. This was followed by normative commitment with a mean score of 3.27, and implies that teachers feel an obligation to their organization. In contrast with teachers’ level of affective commitment and normative commitment, the present study revealed that their continuance commitment, the consideration of the cost of leaving the organization is low (2.94). As a result, continuance commitments the least prevalent type of organizational commitment among secondary school teachers in the present study. It is expected that teachers with a low level of continuance commitment are less likely to leave their school or the profession. According to Meyer and Allen (1997) and Dunham et al., (1994), affective commitment generally has the highest score, followed by normative commitment, with continuance commitment representing the lowest score. The three commitment types should be viewed together as a commitment profile indicating that in the case of secondary schools, teachers have a strong affective and normative commitment profile (Meyer et al., 2012). When a strong affective commitment is combined with normative commitment, it can be experienced as a commitment to ‘do the right thing’ or as a strong sense of morality (Meyer et al., 2012; Maiocco, 2017). This result is also in line with a study conducted by Bekalu et al., (2016), Maiocco, (2017), Dawit & Endris, (2019), Skelton, (2019),Tesfaye, (2021), Sukarmin and Sin, (2022) which indicated that the mean score of teachers’ affective commitment had the highest of the three teachers commitment dimensions followed by the mean score of teachers’ normative commitment and teachers’ continuance commitment had the lowest mean score of the three dimensions. Concerning this, the present study is very consistent with studies conducted by Skelton, (2019) among many others, there was a weak to moderate relationship between perceived affective and normative levels of organizational commitment and all functions of perceived instructional leadership of principals and the frequency with which principals were perceived to practice these functions of instructional leadership and higher levels of affective organizational commitment and normative organizational commitment were found to correlate with the instructional leadership functions of “defining school mission,” However, contrasting results were noted in the study by Anderson, (2023), Mesfin, (2023), Bekele et al., (2025), which indicated that the mean score for normative commitment had the highest mean score followed by continuance commitment and affective commitment had the lowest mean score of the three commitment dimension, and the results of the study by Esponda-Pérez, (2024) which indicated that the mean score for continuance commitment had the highest mean score followed by normative commitment and affective commitment had the lowest mean score of the three commitment dimension and study by Endale, (2019) which indicated that the mean score for continuance commitment had the highest mean score followed by teachers' affective commitment and normative commitment had the lowest mean score of the three teachers commitment dimension and Bekele et al., (2025) which indicated that the mean score for affective commitment had the highest mean score followed by teachers’ continuance commitment and normative teachers’ commitment had the lowest mean score of the three teachers’ commitment dimension. According to Irmayani et al., (2022), excellent work quality is the result of teachers' dedication, which is essential because commitment requires serious concentration from the teacher. Relationship between instructional leadership style and teachers’ commitment Correlation analysis model was used to assess the influence of instructional leadership style of principals on teachers’ commitment. The respondents were asked to indicate whether instructional leadership style of principals influenced teachers’ commitment. Pearson correlation analysis was used to test the type of relationship existing between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment. Table 7 shows the correlation between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment. Table 7: Relationship between instructional leadership style and teachers’ commitment (n = 306, p <0.05) Correlations teachers’ commitment Instructional leadership .795 ** **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Table 7 portrays correlation coefficient between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ teachers commitment. Pearson’s correlation coefficient is .795 which is significant at .01 level of confidence. Result declares positive and significant correlation between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers commitment. This result is also in line with the study results conducted by Ail et al., (2015) which indicated that the relationship between instructional leadership and the level of teachers’ commitment is high. This result is also supported by the study results conducted by Sugandi et al., (2022), Qadarsih et al., (2023) which indicated that there was a significant and positive relationship between instructional leadership of school headmasters and work commitment, Similarly, Ahmasiyanto, Mahrita & Suriansyah, (2022) also found that there was a direct and indirect correlation between instructional leadership, work commitment. In addition, the findings of the literature review conducted by Sucitra et al., (2024) also revealed that the instructional leadership of school principals and the resulting organizational commitment have a positive, and statistically significant with teacher organizational commitment. Further, the results of study by Imran et al., (2025) also found that there was a positive correlation between instructional leadership and teachers commitment. Moreover, Zamani et al., (2024) found that there was a significant relationship between teacher commitment and instructional leadership. Likewise, Thien et al., (2023) also found that there is a direct relationship between instructional leadership and teacher commitment was significant at the school level. Khan et al., (2024) also found that teachers’ perceptions of creating a school mission implemented by the principal were significantly correlated with teacher commitment to school and teachers’ perceptions were also found positively and significantly correlated with teacher commitment to school. The study's findings of Khan et al., (2020) also support this findings which indicated that there is a significant and statistically positive relationship between principals' instructional leadership and teacher's organizational commitment. The results of study by Ariansyah et al., (2022) also found a significant relationship between instructional leadership and work commitment. Taimin and Kim, (2025) reviewed and critically analyzed a total of 13 articles that focused exclusively on instructional leadership and teachers’ organizational commitment, indicated the relevance of investigating both constructs, but the inconsistent outcomes that show the level and strength of relationship between them, highlight significant gaps that requires further inquiry. Notably, while instructional leadership was rated highly, organizational commitment demonstrates variation, suggesting the influence of contextual, generational and definitional differences. Similarly, the result of research by Amri, (2024) indicates that the correlation coefficient values: instructional leadership (0.364), organizational culture (0.389), organizational commitment (0.376). The result research conclude that valid and reliable based on correlation coefficient value based on validator assessments of the instructional leadership, organizational culture, and organizational commitment variables at high school. Relationship between instructional leadership style and teachers’ commitment dimensions Using Pearson correlation analysis, the variation of data on instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment dimensions was assessed. The respondents were asked to indicate whether instructional leadership style of principals affected teachers’ commitment. Pearson correlation coefficient analysis was used to test the type of relationship existing between instructional leadership dimensions and teachers’ commitment dimensions. Table 8 shows the correlation between dimensions of instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment dimensions. Table 8: Relationship between instructional leadership and teachers’ commitment (n = 306, p <0.05) Correlations DSM MIP DPSLC Affective commitment .790 ** .805 ** .807 ** Continuance commitment .681 ** .501 ** .693 ** Normative commitment .769 ** .714 ** .741 ** **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). The data in Table 8 portray the correlation between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers commitment. As the results of a two-tailed Pearson correlation in table 8 above indicated, the p-value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01) for defining school mission. This shows that there was statistically significant relationship between defining school mission and affective commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was .790**showing a high strength at 0.01 confidence level which is highly significant relationship between defining school mission and affective commitment. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 15, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01), showing significant relationship between defining school mission and normative commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.769** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 15, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01), showing significant relationship between defining school mission and continuance commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.681** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 8, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01), showing significant relationship between managing instructional program and affective commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.805** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. Furthermore, the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis indicated the significant relationship between managing instructional program and continuance commitment of the teachers as of the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01). The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.501** meaning the strength of relationship was moderate, positive and highly significant relationship. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 8, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01), showing significant relationship between managing instructional program and normative commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.714** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 8, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01), showing significant relationship between developing positive school learning climate and affective commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.807** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. Furthermore, the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis indicated the significant relationship between developing positive school learning climate and continuance commitment of the teachers as of the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p< 0.01). The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.693** meaning the strength of relationship was high, positive and highly significant relationship. The above table also depicted, the P-value i.e. 0.00 (p < 0.01) shows statistically significant relationship between developing positive school learning climate and normative commitment with high strength since the (r) value was 0.741** meaning the strength of relationship was high, positive and highly significant relationship. Considering the outcome of the correlation analysis of all components of instructional leadership and affective, continuance and normative commitment, the results indicated instructional leadership (Defining the school mission, Managing instructional program and Developing positive school learning climate)accounted for the strongest linear relationships in affective, continuance and normative commitment. The positive normative commitment relationship indicates that government secondary school teachers working with instructional leaders have a perceived obligation to their organizations (Hosseingholizadeh et al., 2023; Sucitra et al., 2024) The results of this study is consistent with the findings of similar studies like Mowday et al., (1979; Pierro et al., (2013); Duggal et al., (2018); Khan et al., (2020); Latif, (2021); Cansoy et al., (2022); Nazim et al., (2023); Thien et al., (2023) and Imran et al., (2025) who found that a significant positive relationship between instructional leadership style and all dimensions of teachers commitment and suggested that instructional leadership is important to increased organizational commitment. The results of this study are consistent with the research findings by Baek et al., (2019) which indicated that there was a statistically significant relationship between instructional leadership dimensions and teachers commitment dimensions. This result is in also in contrary to the findings of study by Skelton, (2019) which indicated that correlations between perceived continuance commitment of teachers and perceived dimensions and functions of instructional leadership of principals were very weak or no correlation. In addition Pvma, (2024) also found that the relationship between the dimensions of principals' instructional leadership practices (defining the school's mission managing instructional programs developing a positive school climate) and commitment also shows weak relationships. The findings of the study by Sarikaya, Nuray & Erdogan, (2016) revealed that the principals most display instructional leadership behaviors involved in the dimension of setting and sharing of school goals and least display the instructional leadership behaviors encompassed by the dimension of supporting and developing teachers. 4.3.2.1. Regression of instructional leadership styles and teachers’ commitment To determine the influence of instructional leadership styles of principals have on teachers’ job satisfaction, a multiple linear regression model was fitted with defining school mission, managing instructional program and developing positive school learning climate as the independent variables. Regression analysis was conducted to test the relationship between instructional leadership styles (predictor variables) and teachers’ commitment (dependent variable). A multiple regression model was fitted to determine the combined relationship of leadership practices (defining school mission, managing instructional program, and developing positive school learning climate on teachers’ commitment). Table 9: Model Summary for instructional leadership andteachers’ commitment Model Summary b Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .989 a .979 .979 .15665 a. Predictors: (Constant), Developing school learning climate, Define school mission, Managing instructional program b. Dependent Variable: Teachers commitment Table 9 shows the summary of the regression analysis of principal leadership style and teachers’ commitment. It can be seen from the model that principal’s leadership style of secondary schools explained 0.979 percent of the variance in teachers’ commitment. In addition the beta weight is 0.989 which tells us that for every standard unit change in the principal’s leadership style the teachers’ commitment will raise by 98 percent of one standard unit. This shows that principal’s leadership style has a considerable impact on teachers’ commitment. This results also in line with the study by Somphors, (2025) who found that instructional leadership significantly predicted teacher commitment to teaching (Adjusted R² = 0.206, F(5, 613) = 33.026, p < 0.001) and commitment to school (Adjusted R² = 0.283, F(5, 613) = 49.683, p < 0.001). The results of multiple regression analysis by Cansoy et al., (2022) found that school principals’ instructional leadership significantly predicted teacher commitment (β = .57, p < .05) explained 33% of the variance in teacher commitment in Istanbul province of Turkey. The Nellitawati et al., (2024) research showed that the principal's instructional leadership contributed to improving teacher commitment 22.5%. A study of Sukarmin & Sin, (2022) also found that instructional leadership is a significant predictor of teacher commitment to school (β = 0.397 Adjusted R2 = 0.154, t = 5.139, p = 0.001) whereby instructional leadership explains 15.4 percent of variances in teacher commitment to school in Indonesia. Nazim et al., (2023) found that instructional leadership has a direct positive and significant effect on organizational commitment as indicated by the results of the T-Statistic 87.320 and P-Values 0.000. Khan et al., (2024) found that the beta coefficients the adjusted R² value was 0.276 which indicates 27.6% of the variance in teacher commitment to school was explained by the model, both school mission (β =.31, p < .0001) and school learning climate (β =.26, p < .0001) were significant predictors of teacher commitment to the school. The results of multiple regression analysis by Cansoy et al., (2022) supports the current result whose findings indicated that school principals’ instructional leadership behaviors could predict teacher commitment in Istanbul province of Turkey. This result is also in line with the results of study by Tatlah et al., (2019) conducted on the effect of instructional leadership on teachers’ performance and job commitmentin Pakistan which indicated that the results of F-test which supports the predictive utilities of instructional leadership on teachers’ job commitment. Whereas, R-square =.715, adjusted R-square =.518, and F = 62.3 is significant at p=0.000 with DF =1. The research by Nellitawati et al., (2024) on the influence of instructional leadership and work commitment showed that the principal's instructional leadership contributed 7.8% to improving teacher performance, while work commitment contributed 22.5%. When these two variables were combined, they explained 23.1% of the variability in teacher performance. In a study by Keman et al., (2025) revealed that the headmaster’s leadership accounts for 42% of the teachers’ commitment. Meanwhile, teachers’ commitment, in turn, accounts for 41% of the success in instilling al-Hikmah values. Table 10: Analysis of variance for instructional leadership andteachers’ commitment ANOVA a Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 12.696 3 4.232 4979.777 .000 b Residual .257 302 .001 Total 12.953 305 a. Dependent Variable: Teachers commitment b. Predictors: (Constant), Developing school learning climate, Defining school mission, Managing instructional program Analysis of variance for regression tests the general significance of the regression model fitted. In a bivariate regression model with only one coefficient, the ANOVA tests whether the estimated coefficient is not equal to zero. Table 10 shows the ANOVA for the bivariate regression of instructional leadership on teachers’ commitment. As illustrated in p-value of the ANOVA, F-statistic was obtained as 0.000 which is less than 0.05. Therefore, the model is statistically significant in predicting the influence of defining school mission, managing instructional program and developing positive school learning climate on teachers’ commitment, implying that instructional leadership dimensions have a significant influence on teachers’ commitment. Table 11: Regression coefficients for instructional leadership and teachers’ commitment Coefficients a Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) -.024 .006 -4.245 .000 Defining school mission .501 .026 .457 19.142 .000 Managing instructional program .065 .057 .070 1.137 .256 Developing school learning climate .472 .057 .480 8.231 .000 a. Dependent Variable: Teachers commitment Data in Table 11 illustrates how leadership styles predict teachers’ commitment. For Defining the school mission dimension, the Beta coefficient is 0.457 (p<0.05), which means that for every standard deviation increase in Defining the school mission, teachers commitment increases by (45.7%). For Managing instructional program, the standardized Beta coefficient is 0.070 (p<0.05), which means that for every standard deviation increase in Managing instructional program, teachers’ commitment increases by (7.0%). For Developing school learning climate, the standardized Beta coefficient is 0.480 (p<0.05), which means that for every standard deviation increase in Developing school learning climate, teachers’ commitment increases by (48.0%).This result is also supported by the results of study by Khan et al., (2024) which employed simultaneous multiple regression to examine the best predictors of teacher commitment to school, the combination of variables to predict teacher commitment to school from sub-constructs of instructional leadership namely creating school mission and school learning climate was statistically significant F(2, 616) = 118.52, p < .0001). Similarly, the results of study by Sucitra, Hariri, Riswandi, et al., (2024) also found that the direct effect of instructional leadership on job satisfaction was 32.2%. The direct effect of job satisfaction on organizational commitment was 17.6%. The direct effect of instructional leadership on organizational commitment was 30.6%. Furthermore, the indirect effect of instructional leadership on organizational commitment through job satisfaction was 2%, with the remaining influence attributed to other variables. Similarly the results of study conducted by Tatlah et al., (2019) also found the same result which was the direct effect of instructional leadership on unstandardized coefficient of instructional leadership on teachers commitment β^ =.845, t= 7.898, p = 0.00 was found statistically significant. However, contrasting results were noted in the study by Vivian, (2025) which indicated that instructional leadership was not significantly predict teacher job commitment. Conclusions The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, job satisfactions and organizational commitment of teachers in secondary schools of east Hararghe zone. The finding disclosed that instructional leadership can positively influence teachers’ commitment to be willing and remain in the organization and feel part of it. The instructional leadership focuses more on the human side of individuals and their professional development, motivation, satisfaction and commitment. Thus, school principal instructional leadership behaviors enacted as a member of the institution, and no longer seek merely self-interest, but which is beneficial to the school as a whole. When the school principals are of great follower characteristics, they listen to individual teachers comments, attend to the needs of teachers, give them mental stimulation, and provide a situation where teachers develop a sense of attachment to their stand make them strive for the success of the school by developing participative school mission, managing instructional program and developing a positive school learning climate. The role of the school principals as an instructional leader greatly contributes to the improvement of school performance and contributes to the level of job satisfaction and commitment of teachers. Teachers and students together need appreciation, incentives, and even recognition for the efforts they have put in. This element has a huge impact on the formation of motivation, determination, & enthusiasm to keep trying among teachers and students. The efforts of the school principals in rewarding are very practical & should be done as a means to increase self-confidence and also appreciation. All parties must work together to make the school a knowledge-based institution that will produce successful human beings. Based on the results of the analysis in the study, it can be concluded that there is a direct correlation between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment. Also a direct correlation between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment dimensions of secondary school teachers in east Hararghe zone. In addition, majority of teachers in east Hararghe zone secondary schools experienced a moderate level commitment. Similarly, teachers’ organizational commitment towards their institutions and some teachers had a moderate emotional attachment, belongingness, and moderate obligation to stay in the schools. Nevertheless, their continuance commitment is relatively low which indicates leaving the organization has a high cost for the teachers or their perceived lack of alternatives. On the other hand, when the school principals exhibit instructional leadership behavior more the teachers will be satisfied more, and they will be better committed to their schools'. These findings indicate that systemic issues in the teaching working environment have not been adequately addressed by educational stakeholders, necessitating urgent and targeted interventions that simultaneously improve both job satisfaction & commitment to mitigate the risk of teacher attrition. 5.3. Recommendations In the preceding sections, the summary of the major findings and conclusions drawn out were presented successively. Therefore, based on the major findings of the study and conclusions, the following recommendations were put forward to school principals, Woreda education offices and zone education office heads and other concerned body of east Hararghe zone school principals to assess their leadership skill and improve the level of their teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment by formulating different policy directions. v The highly practiced instructional leadership dimensions in east Hararghe zone was defining school mission though managing instructional program and developing positive school climate positively correlated with organizational commitment. Thus, school principals should acquire a sense of understanding and need to make self-assessment on their leadership effectiveness to implement all the three dimensions of instructional leadership style in correspondence with teachers’ commitment. v The East Hararghe zone and woreda education offices would also provide periodic school leadership development workshops, training and seminars to improve school principal’s leadership behavior and appreciating individual and team contributions. Research in this area would also help East Hararghe zone and woreda education administrators to determine the degree to which principals exhibit certain behaviors & whether these behaviors lead to increased teachers commitment. v Using appropriate leadership style can have direct and indirect effect on organizational commitments and job satisfaction of teachers. This shows whenever secondary school principals education invest more on the development of school principals, directly or indirectly they can improve the job satisfaction and organizational commitment of their teachers. Therefore, school principals should be observant in noticing how their behaviors and characteristics are being modeled to ensure that their leadership is cascading effectively. For example, school principals may demonstrate instructional leadership to the teachers and department heads. v Furthermore, the job satisfaction is positively related to organizational commitment, which is a signal to the secondary school principals and other concerned bodies that they need to ensure teachers should be highly satisfied with their job in order to improve the occurrence of highly committed teachers which in turn affect the overall effectiveness of their school. Therefore, school principals should foster a positive school climate: promote collaboration, recognition, and trust among staff to build a supportive and motivating work environment. v Thus, it is possible to suggest that an effort made to increase teachers’ job satisfaction in each facet is an effort made to increase the teacher’s emotional & moral attachment to their school. Therefore, school principals would also enhance instructional support: provide regular & constructive feedback, facilitate professional development & ensure the availability of teaching resources to support instructional quality. Recommendations for future Research Any research has its own limitations and this research is not an exception. As a result, it has come up with some suggestions for future research. These include but may not be limited to the following. · This study focused on instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment of government secondary school in east Hararghe zone. A replication of this study could be conducted in primary schools in future research. The teachers and principals in this study practiced in government school settings. Future research could focus on private schools and compare instructional leadership, teachers’ commitment in private schools. Principal perceptions of self-reported instructional leadership could be compared to teacher perceptions of instructional leadership, teachers’ commitment in future studies. · This quantitative research was limited to the study of correlation between leadership styles, teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools. The study did not look for causation or the meanings behind the results. Further research into human behavior and reasons that govern the association between leadership styles, job satisfaction and organizational commitment might reveal additional information that schools could use in developing leaders and meeting specific organizational goals. Future research could provide further insight under a mixed methods approach using both quantitative and qualitative procedures to collect and analyze data responses to explore the causal relationships between instructional leadership and teacher outcomes, particularly in under-researched rural and pastoral settings. · In my study, we used the PIMRS and TCM to collect data. Future studies can use different instruments to collect data. Other future researchers may use additional instruments include the organizational commitment survey, and the job descriptive index (Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969). Researchers who use these additional instruments may have findings that differ or are like the findings of my study. · Additionally, this study focused on government secondary school in east Hararghe zone, the scope of this study did not include other zones of Oromia regional state and other regions. A similar or replicative study could be conducted in any one of these organizations to determine if findings are consistent or if significant differences exist, particularly in under-researched rural and pastoral settings. · Another area to consider is gender regarding low female participation. A similar study may be conducted within the other zones or within other region that have more gender diversity. Within this study, only 30 (9.8%) female teachers and 2 (3.2%) school principals responded of total responses. The low number of teachers in general and school principals in particular is underrepresented by the female population as a whole, but even more so in primary schools. These results are indicative of the geographical location where this study was conducted, as females are significantly underrepresented in the leadership position but may not be to the same extent in other zones and regions.. · Future studies should include more zones, regions and school levels. They should use long-term methods to find causes. They should add more variables. Using both numbers and detailed interviews would give a better understanding of how leadership, teacher satisfaction, and teacher commitment connect. Limitations of the Research Method and Design The research method and design had some restrictions concerning the analysis of the relationship between leadership style, job satisfaction and commitment. The study used quantitative method and did not cover all research methods. While the quantitative approach is crucial for understanding and identifying trends, relying solely on numbers can restrict the depth and the participants' and teachers' ability to express their views during data collection for this dissertation. Therefore, future research necessitates the use of mixed methods by integrating both quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide a more in-depth understanding of and causes of the problem in the study. Quantitative techniques or research designs like correlational and descriptive survey research designs have benefits as far as analyzing the issues in this study, but they too have shortcomings. A limitation of this descriptive survey study approach is its absence of causality. Descriptive surveys can identify connections and trends but cannot show cause and effect to establish causality. They only provide data without elucidating the rationale behind the observed trends. It is also affected by self-report biases. Due to social desirability, problems of recall or distortion relating to comprehension of the questions, respondents are likely to provide information that contains errors and bias, thus affecting the reliability of the data. Quantitative data is the main data type collected in surveys, leaving out some important aspects and the richness of the respondents' experience and opinions. The study used descriptive-correlational design. This design is good for early-stage and single-time analysis. But they cannot show cause and effect, so, it limited depth. In correlational research designs, for example, the descriptive survey referred to earlier on, correlation does not equate to causation. Where there is a correlation between two variables, it is not implied that there is causation. Declarations 1. Funding Statement: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. 2. Conflict of Interest: The author(s) declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper. 3. Author Contributions · M.A.: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, and drafting of the original manuscript. · B.Z.: Investigation, project administration, supervision of the research, data validation, and manuscript revision and editing. · M.K.: Formal analysis, provision of resources, software support, and manuscript revision and editing. · T.H.: Formal analysis, funding acquisition, provision of resources, coding and theme extraction using SPSS, and manuscript revision and editing. 4. Acknowledgements: The author(s) acknowledges Haramaya University, College of Education and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Educational Planning and Management, for institutional support throughout the research and writing process. 5. Ethics Approval: The present study was approved by Institute of Education and Behavioral Science Research Committee, Haramaya University dated 21.05.2025. The study was performed in accordance with the Haramaya University guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. 6. Consent to Participate: All participating teachers were informed about the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of their participation, and their right to withdraw at any time. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. 7. Consent to Publish: Consent for publication not applicable ; since the study does not include any identifiable images or personal data. 8. Data availability statement : “The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to confidentiality agreements with participating schools, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.” References Abdullah, J., Harbi, A., Alarifi, S., & Mosbah, A. (2018). Transformation leadership and creativity Effects of employees pyschological empowerment and intrinsic motivation Personnel Review 48(5), 1082-1099.https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2017-0354 Abebe, T., & Markos, S. (2016). The Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in Public Higher Education Institution: The Case of Arba Minch University, Ethiopia,. International Journal of Research in Business Management , 4 (8), 2347–4572. Abu, A. R. (2023). Vuca World : The Commitment of teacher organization and student outcome in Malaysian primary school. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences 13 (5), 1378–1389. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i5/16551 Adom, D., Hussein, E. K., & Agyem, J. A. (2018). Mandatory Ingredients of a Quality Research. International Journal of Scientific Research , 7 (1), 438–441. https://wwjournals.com/index.php/ijsr/article/view/6595/6536 Ail, M., Taib, R. bin, Jaafar, H. bt, Salleh, R. bt M., & Omar, N. bin. (2015). Principals’ instructional leadership and teachers’ commitment in Three Mara Junior Science Colleges (Mjsc) in Pahang, Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , 191 (2010), 1848–1853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.512 Akpan, B., Ebenezer, E., & Collins Piate, R. (2023). Assessment of Different Methods of Sampling Techniques: The Strengths and Weakness. Shared Seasoned International Journal of Topical Issues , 9 (1), 64–83. Al-Mahdy, H., Emam, M., & Hallinger, P. (2018). Assessing the contribution of principal instructional leadership and collective teacher efficacy to teacher commitment in Oman. Teaching and Teacher Education , 69 , 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.007 Alemu, A. (2024). Challenges and Prospects: Understanding Teachers’ Attitudes towards the Teaching Profession in Ethiopia Social Sciences & Humanities Open , 10 (June), 100933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100933 Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective , continuance and normative commitment to the organization. 1–18. Amri, U. (2024). The impact of instructional leadership organizational culture and organizational commitment to teacher performance at Junior High school. Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences 22(2), 17231–17240. DOI: 10.57239/PJLSS-2024-22.2.001253 Anderson, V. (2023). The relationship between career satisfaction and organizational commitment: evidence from the Kuwaiti Banking Sector, European Journal of Training and Development – 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2023-0073 Ardo, A., Gurin, M., & Buhari, M. (2024). Effect of affective commitment on the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance of public school teachers in Yobe State, Nigeria. Investment Management and Financial Innovations , 13(3-1), 267-273. doi:10.21511/imfi.13 (3-1). 1–16 Ariansyah, N., Aslamiah, & Sulaiman. (2022). The Relationship Between Instructional Leadership and teacher commitment to Organizational Climate and Teacher Job Satisfaction at TK Strawberry Banjarmasin Utara. Journal of K6 Education and Management , 4 (3), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.11594/jk6em.04.03.06 Askade, B., Yeshitila, M., & Melaku, W. (2025). Assessment of teachers’ job satisfaction and professional commitment at Sekota college of teachers’ education. International Journal of Statistical Distributions and Applications, 11 (2), 45–55 http://www.sciencepg.com/journal/ijsda Ayele, G. (2022). Leadership Styles of Principals and Teachers’ Organizational Commitment in Bale Zone Secondary Schools. The Educational Review, USA , 6 (6), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.26855/er.2022.06.008 Bada, H. A., Ariffin, T. F. T., & Nordin, H. (2020). Teachers’ perception of principals’ instructional leadership practices in Nigeria. Universal Journal of Educational Research , 8 (10), 4459–4469. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081013 Baek, H., Han, K., & Ryu, E. (2019). Authentic leadership, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: The moderating effect of nurse tenure. Journal of Nursing Management , 27 (8), 1655–1663. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12853 Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2005). Transformational leadership: Second edition. Transformational Leadership: Second Edition, 1–282. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617095 Bellibaş, M. Ş. (2016). Principals ’ and Teachers ’ Perceptions of Efforts by Principals to Improve Teaching and Learning in Turkish Middle Schools *. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 15(6), 1471–1485. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.1.0009 Bhalerao, S., & Kadam, P. (2010). Sample size calculation. International Journal of Ayurveda Research , 1 (1), 55. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7788.59946 Binti Si-Rajab, S., Madya, P., & Bin Musa, D. K. (2019). The Level of Instructional Leadership Practices Among Principals of National Religious Secondary School in Malaysia. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management , 7 (03), 927–939. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v7i3.el03 Bratnicka, K. (2015). Relationship Between Leadership Styles and Organizational Creativity. Management and Business Administration. Central Europe , 23 (1), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.7206/mba.ce.2084-3356.134 Bush, T. (2014). Instructional Leadership in Centralized Contexts: Rhetoric or Reality? Educational Management Administration and Leadership , 42 (1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213507207 Cansoy, R. (2018). The Relationship between School Principals’ Leadership Behaviours and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction: A Systematic Review. International Education Studies , 12 (1), 37. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n1p37 Cansoy, R., Parlar, H., & Polatcan, M. (2022a). Collective teacher efficacy as a mediator in the relationship between instructional leadership and teacher commitment. International Journal of Leadership in Education , 25 (6), 900–918. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1708470 Cansoy, R., Parlar, H., & Polatcan, M. (2022b). Collective teacher efficacy as a mediator in the relationship between instructional leadership and teacher commitment. International Journal of Leadership in Education , 25 (6), 900–918. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1708470 Chayomchai, A. (2024). Relationships between Organizational Culture, Organizational Commitment, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review , 07 (05), 2639–2645. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr/v7-i5-25 Cochran, W. G. (1977). Cochran_1977_ Sampling Techniques. pdf (pp. 1–428). Cohen, A., & Liu, Y. (2011). Relationships between in-role performance and individual values, commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior among Israeli teachers. International Journal of Psychology , 46 (4), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.539613 Cohen, Y., Dokkum, P. van, Danieli, S., Romanowsky, A. J., Abraham, R., Merritt, A., Zhang, J., Mowla, L., Kruijssen, J. M. D., Conroy, C., & Wasserman, A. (2018). The Dragonfly Nearby Galaxies Survey. V. HST/ACS Observations of 23 Low Surface Brightness Objects in the Fields of NGC 1052, NGC 1084, M96, and NGC 4258. The Astrophysical Journal , 868 (2), 96. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aae7c8 Collins, S. P., Storrow, A., Liu, D., Jenkins, C. A., Miller, K. F., Kampe, C., & Butler, J. (2021). Examining Whether a Self-Care Program Reduces Healthcare Use and Improves Health among Patients with Acute Heart Failure—The Guided HF Study Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute 67–186. https://doi.org/10.25302/04.2021.AD.140921656 Creswell, J., W. (2009). Mapping the Field of Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research , 3 (2), 95–108. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1558689808330883 Creswell, J. W. (2014). Proceedings of the annual conference of the international speech communication association, INTERSPEECH. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, INTERSPEECH . Dea Lerra, M. (2021). The Link and Effect of Leadership Style on Teacher Organizational Commitment in South Ethiopia: A Case of Wolaita Zone. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education , 12 (12), 3449–3456. Demissie, M. M. (2023). Principals’ Leadership Styles and Secondary School Teachers ’ Organiza- tional Commitment in Ethiopia. Dilla Journal of Education , 2 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.20372/dje.v02i01.01 Donald, M. F. (2016). “ The relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational commitment among academics : the mediating effect of job satisfaction ” I nvestment Management and Financial Innovations . https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.13(3-1).2016.13 Duggal, C., Sriram, S., & Jain, K. (2018). Marriage Counsellors’ Reflections on the Counselling Process in Family Courts in India. Psychological Studies , 63 (4), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0460-z Dunham, R. B., Grube, J. A., & Castaneda, M. B. (1994). Organizational Commitment : The Utility of an Integrative Definition. Journal of Applied Psychology 79 (3), 370–380 DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370. Endalu, T. M. (2024). Principals’ Leadership Styles and Teachers’ Organizational Commitment: The Mediating Role of Teachers’ Job Satisfaction in Addis Ababa Government Secondary Schools. 1–185.Doctor of Philosophy, Addis Ababa University Esponda-Pérez, J. & M. F. J. & C. K. (2024). Extent of Teachers Organizational Commitment Among University School Teachers. Kurdish Studies , 12 (1), 2368–2380. https://doi.org/10.58262/ks.v12i1.165 Feyisa, L. B., & Edosa, K. C. (2023). Instructional Leadership Practices and Challenges: The Case of Primary School Principals in Liban Jawi Woreda of West Shoa Zone. Education Research International , 2023 . (2):1-11 https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/3439653 Gardner, A. (2018). The relationship between organizational commitment and transformational and transactional leadership styles in government contract employees. PhD Thesis , December , 1–148.Doctor of Philosophy, Walden University Gechere, T., Oumer, J., & Ouke, T. (2025). Influence of principals’ instructional leadership and teachers’ efficacy on students’ performance in secondary schools in the Wolaita Zone, South Ethiopia. Discover Sustainability , 6 (1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01797-3 Geda, T. B. (2015). Principals’ leadership behavior and teachers commitment in Adama Town Public Secondary Schools of Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences , 6 (4S1), 204–209. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4s1p204 Getahun, T., Tefera, B. F., & Burichew, A. H. (2016). Teacher’s Job Satisfaction And Its Relationship With Organizational Commitment In Ethiopian Primary Schools: Focus On Primary Schools Of Bonga Town. European Scientific Journal, ESJ , 12 (13), 380. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n13p380 Gurmu, T. G. (2018). Development of the Ethiopian school leadership: foundation, self-dependence, and historical erratic evolution. Journal of Educational Administration and History , 50 (4), 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2018.1512956 Habibi, A. (2025). Commitment and school climate on teachers ’ job satisfaction and performance: Asian context. November. Asian Education and Development Studies 14 (5), pp. 1002-1021https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-11-2024-0262 Hallinger, P., & Hosseingholizadeh, R. (2018). Do beliefs make a difference ? Exploring how principal self-efficacy and instructional leadership impact teacher efficacy and commitment in Iran. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 46 (5), 800–819. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217700283 Hallinger, P., & Lee, M. (2013). International Journal of Educational Development Exploring principal capacity to lead reform of teaching and learning quality in Thailand §. International Journal of Educational Development , 33 (4), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2012.03.002 Hallinger, P., & Lee, M. (2014). Mapping instructional leadership in Thailand: Has education reform impacted principal practice? Educational Management Administration and Leadership , 42 (1), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502196 Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the Instructional Management Behavior of Principals. The Elementary School Journal , 86 (2), 217–247. https://doi.org/10.1086/461445 Hallinger, P., Wang, W. C., Chen, C. W., & Li, D. (2015). Assessing instructional leadership with the principal instructional management rating scale. In Assessing Instructional Leadership with the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (Issue May 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15533-3 Harahap, M. E., & Suriansyah, A. (2019). Relationship of instructional leadership, organizational climate and teacher’s commitment to job satisfaction. Journal of K6, Education, and Management , 2 (4), 260–270. https://doi.org/10.11594/jk6em.02.04.01 Harris, A., Jones, M., Adams, D., & Cheah, K. (2019). Instructional leadership in Malaysia: a review of the contemporary literature*. School Leadership and Management , 39 (1), 76–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2018.1453794 Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2018). Do Ethical , Authentic , and Servant Leadership Explain Variance Above and Beyond Transformational Leadership ? A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Management 44 (2), 501–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316665461 Hosseingholizadeh, R., Amrahi, A., & El-Farr, H. (2023). Instructional leadership, and teacher’s collective efficacy, commitment, and professional learning in primary schools: a mediation model. Professional Development in Education , 49 (3), 518–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1850510 Imran, Q., Ghani, U., & Kazimi, A. B. (2025). The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies Examining The Impact of Instructional Leadership on Teachers’ Organizational Commitment: Mediating Role of Teacher Trust in Principal and Teacher Motivation. The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies 3 (2), 1037–1056. Ingersoll, R. M. (2020). Misdiagnosing the Teacher Quality Problem. The State of Education Policy Research, February, 291–306. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003064466-24 Iram Tahir, & Noor Fatima. (2023). Effect of principal’s instructional leadership practices on teachers’ professional development: A cross sectional study of secondary school level from selected areas of Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan. International Journal of Science and Research Archive , 10 (2), 590–606. https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2023.10.2.0986 Irmayani, I., Nasution, S. L., & Halim, A. (2022). Work Involvement, Work Attitude, Discipline and Commitment to Employee Productivity Office Regional Revenue Agency Labuhanbatu Regency. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI) 5(1), 2679-2690, https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v5i1.3877 Jeannette, N., Ntawiha, P., & Leonard Buhigiro, J. (2023). Influence of Primary School Head Teachers’ Instructional Leadership on Teachers’ Professional Practices in Musanze District, Rwanda. East African Journal of Education and Social Sciences , 4 (4), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.46606/eajess2023v04i04.0312 Jilcha, K. (2019). Research Design and Methodolog https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731 Kassaw, E. S., & Golga, D. N. (2019). Academic staffs’ level of organizational commitment in higher educational setting: The case of Haramaya university. International Journal of Higher Education , 8 (2), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v8n2p87 Kaya, K., Erdoğan, O., Yeşil, Y., & Sezgin, F. (2024). The Roles of collective teacher efficacy and commitment in the relationship between Turkish Language teachers’ job satisfaction and school principal distributed leadership. SAGE Open , 14 (3), 1–15.. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241271136 Kemal Abdurahim Ahmed. (2016). Instructional Leadership Practices in Maldives. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Review , 4 (7), 191–211. Keman, N. J., Alias, B. S., & Norhaini, A. (2025). The influence of the headmaster ’ s transformational leadership on teacher’s commitment to the instillation of al-Hikmah International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 15 (3), 2148–2164. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v15-i3/25169 Khan, A. A., Asimiran, S. Bin, Kadir, S. A., Alias, S. N., Atta, B., Bularafa, B. A., & Rehman, M. U. (2020). Instructional leadership and students academic performance: Mediating effects of teacher’s organizational commitment. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research , 19 (10), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.26803/IJLTER.19.10.13 Khan, F., & Gupta, V. (2025). Examining the relationships between instructional leadership , teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: a study of primary schools in India Journal of Educational Administration 62 (2), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2022-0145 Khan, S., Mok, S., Sam, R., Mam, S., Em, S., & Pen, D. (2024). Teachers’ Perceptions on Directors’ Instructional Leadership in Secondary Resource Schools: Regional Variations and Impacts on Teachers Commitment in Cambodia. European Journal of Contemporary Education and E-Learning , 2 (6), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.59324/ejceel.2024.2(6).17 Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2025). The mediating effect of teacher commitment in the relationship between burnout and role performance of early childhood teachers Front. Education 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1474838 Kiral, E., & Suçi̇çeği̇, -Aynur. (2017). The Relationship between teachers’ perception of school principals’ instructional leadership and organisational commitment level. International Journal of Psycho-Educational Sciences , 6 (1), 95–109. Kubai, P. K. (2023). Full Range Leadership Styles On Organizational Performance Of Private Universities In Kenya Polycarp Koome Kubai ( Human Resource Management ) Jomo Kenyatta University, Doctor of Philosophy, Jomo Kenyatta University . Kumar, S. (2024). Analyzing the Factors Influencing Job Satisfaction among Teachers: A Study of Work Environment, Professional Development, and Work-Life Balance. November. Bhartiyam International Journal of Education & Research , 13 (4), 1-12. Lacaza, J. L., & Dioso, E. (2025). School Principals’ Instructional Leadership Behavior and Job Satisfaction of Teachers: A Correlation. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Viewpoints , 1 (4), 552–577. https://doi.org/10.64612/ijiv.v1i4.32 Latif, Z., & Habib, Z. (2021). Relationship between instructional leadership practices and organizational commitment of teachers at secondary school level in Lahore Districts. Journal of Educational Research and Social Sciences Review , 1 (4), 12-19. Serang, S., Ramlawati, R., Suriyanti, S., Junaidi, J., & Nurimansjah, R. A. (2024). The role of ethical leadership on employees’ behaviors and commitment to the organization SA Journal of Human Resource Management , 22 , 2373 Leshem, S., & Trafford, V. (2007). Overlooking the conceptual framework. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 44 (1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290601081407 Lima, W., & Allida, D. 2021. The relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment among employees of a selected tertiary educational institution in Northwest Haiti East African Journal of Education and Social Sciences , 2(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.46606/eajess2021v02i01.0063 Maiocco, K. A. (2017). A Quantitative Examination of the Relationship Between Leadership and Organizational Commitment in Employees of Faith-Based Organizations. Doctor of Philosophy, Liberty University Marie, G., Agad, J. B., & Pinca, J. T. (2025). The Relationship between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction among Early Childhood Teachers. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies , 51 (7), 255–262. Metaferia, T., Baraki, Z., & Mebratu, B. (2023). Link between transformational leadership and teachers organizational commitment in Addis Ababa government secondary schools Link between transformational leadership and teachers organizational commitment in Addis Ababa government secondary schools. Cogent Education , 10 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2187563 Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (2004). TCM Employee Commitment Survey Academic Users Guide 2004. University of Western Ontario, 16. http://employeecommitment.com/TCM-Employee-Commitment-Survey-Academic-Package-2004.pdf%0Ahttp://audacityblog.info/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Meyer-Allen-Empl-Commitment-Survey.pdf Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and Test of a Three-Component Conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology , 78 (4), 538–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538 Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002a). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 61 (1), 20–52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842 Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002b). Affective , Continuance , and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-analysis of Antecedents , Correlates , and Consequences Journal of vocational behavior 61(1), 20–52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842 Meyer, J. P., Stanley, L. J., & Parfyonova, N. M. (2012). Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 80 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.07.002 Mohamad Zaki, M. bin. (2022). Instructional Leadership and The Commitment of School Organizations. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development , 11 (3), 454–464. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v11-i3/14771 Norawati, S., Mulyadi, M. A., Syahsudarmi, S., Yantama, A. A., & Fuaddi, H. (2025). Analisis Dampak Sertifikasi Guru Dan Budaya Sekolah Terhadap Kinerja Guru Dengan Kepuasan Kerja Sebagai Variabel Intervening JURNAL MANAJEMEN DAN BISNIS , 4 (2), 541-560. Mowday_R_T_Steers_R_M_and_Porter_L_W_1979. The measurement of organizational commitment Journal of vocational behavior 14 (2), 224-247 Munna, A. S. (2023). Instructional Leadership and Role of Module Leaders. International Journal of Educational Reform , 32 (1), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879211042321 Nanjundeswaraswamy, T. S. (2023). The mediating role of job satisfaction in the relationship between leadership styles and employee commitment. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences , 39 (2), 286–304. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEAS-02-2021-0029 Nazim, M., Agung, A. A. G., Yudana, I. M., & Dantes, K. R. (2023). influence of instructional leadership and organizational commitment to elementary schools teacher performance in Central Lombok. International Research Journal of Management, IT and Social Sciences , 10 (5), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.21744/irjmis.v10n5.2364 Nellitawati, Ganefri, Rusdinal, Hardianto, Setiawan, M. N. A., Ginanjar, S., & Arwildayanto. (2024). The influence of instructional leadership and work commitment on teacher performance. Cakrawala Pendidikan , 43 (3), 546–561. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v43i3.66677 Neziri, I. (2021). Teacher Commitment: the Relationship Between the Continuance, Affective and Normative Work Commitment and the Physical, Social and Psychological Work Conditions. NWSA Academic Journals , 16 (2), 28–43. https://doi.org/10.12739/nwsa.2021.16.2.1c0705 Noor, T., & Nawab, A. (2022). Are school leaders working as instructional leaders? Exploration of school leadership practices in rural Pakistan. Cogent Education , 9 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2109315 Nyenyembe, F. W., Maslowski, R., Nimrod, B. S., & Peter, L. (2016). Leadership Styles and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction in Tanzanian Public Secondary Schools. Universal Journal of Educational Research , 4 (5), 980–988. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040507 Okwisa, M .2023. Leadership practices and academic performance of primary schools, Doctor of Philisophy, Jomo Kenyatta University 167. Oyewobi, L. O. (2022). Leadership styles and employees commitment: the mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Facilities Management , 22 (5), 737–757. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-06-2022-0069 Park, S., & Choi, S. (2025). Boosting novice teachers’ retention intention: international evidence on the role of mentoring via job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Educational Administration , 63 (6), 489-504 https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-04-2024-0108 Patel, M., & Patel, N. (2019). Exploring research methodology International Journal of Research and Review , 6 (3), 48-55. Pierro, A., Raven, B. H., Amato, C., & Bélanger, J. J. (2013). Bases of social power, leadership styles, and organizational commitment. International Journal of Psychology , 48 (6), 1122–1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.733398 Ping, G. C., & Mohd Hamzah, M. I. (2021). the Level of Principal’S Instructional Leadership Practices and Its Relationship With School-Based Management in Secondary School in Tumpat District, Kelantan, Malaysia. International Journal of Educational Best Practices , 5 (1), 106. https://doi.org/10.31258/ijebp.v5n1.p106-116 Purnomo, B. R., Eliyana, A., & Pramesti, E. D. (2020). The effect of leadership style, organizational culture and job satisfaction on employee performance with organizational commitment as the intervening variable. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy , 11 (10), 446–458. https://doi.org/10.31838/srp.2020.10.68 Pvma, A. (2024). OJ-TP The Structural Relationship Between Principal ’ s Instructional Leadership , Teacher Commitment and Teacher Self-Efficacy in Program Vokasional Menengah. . Online Journal for TVET Practitioners , 9 (2), 1-15. 9(2), 1–15. Qadarsih, L., Aslamiah, A., & Sulaiman, S. (2023). Relationship between Principal Instructional Leadership, Job Satisfaction, Work Commitment and Performance of SDN Teacher in South Banjarmasin District, Banjarmasin City. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research , 06 (05), 2903–2911. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i5-50 Quiroz, G. O. (2021). The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15): Validation in Mexico and Disorder in the State of Knowledge The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 9 (4), 196–203.DOI: 10.1177/0091415020957387 Saleem, Z. (2017). A Study of the relationship between school principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ organzational commitmnet: Moderating role of emotional intelligence and support Doctoral of Philosophy, National University of Modern Languages Islamabad Sarikaya, Nuray & Erdogan, C. (2016). Relationship between the Instructional Leadership Behaviors of High School Principals and Teachers’ Organizational Commitment. Journal of Education and Practice , 7 (3), 72–82. Shaari, R., Kamarudin, D., Ju, S., & Zakaria, H. (2022). Effects of Leadership Types on Job Satisfaction Among Malaysian Higher Education Institutions. Journal of Instruction 10 (1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.47215/aji.1020324 Shaked, H. (2025). How principals’ instructional leadership impacts schools’ middle leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 53(5), 977-990 https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432241238888 Shiferaw, G., & Ph, W. (2025). The mediating effect of organizational commitment on the relationship between teachers ’ job satisfaction and turnover intention. 25(3), 112–128. Simin Ghavifekr, Omaymah Radwan, & M. Velarde, J. (2019). Teachers’ perceptions of principals’ instructional leadership roles and practices. Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia , 44 (2), 72–83. Skelton,T .2019. The relationship between organizational climate and organizational commitment of teachers. Doctor of Education, Louisiana Tech University Smith, A. M. (2025). Leading factors positively impacting teacher job satisfaction (Thesis, Concordia University, St. Paul). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.csp.edu/teachereducation_masters/135 Sucitra, D. A., Hariri, H., & Riswandi, R. (2024). Effect of principal instructional leadership on teacher commitment. Journal of Education and Learning , 18 (2), 279–285. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v18i2.20980 Sucitra, D. A., Hariri, H., Riswandi, R., & Handoko, H. (2024). The Impact of Instructional Leadership, Organizational Culture, and Job Satisfaction on Teacher Commitment in Primary Schools. Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan Dan Ilmu Tarbiyah , 9 (1), 181. https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v9i1.20077 Sugandi, B., Tadesse, E., & Ghassani, N. (2022). A correlation study between principals‘ instructional leadership practice and teacher s‘commitment in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research 10(06), 77-93 Sukarmin, & Sin, I. (2022). the Influence of Principal Instructional Leadership Behaviour on the Organisational Commitment of Junior High School Teachers in Surakarta. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction , 19 (2), 69–95. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2022.19.2.3 Sultan, F. M. M., Karuppannan, G., & Rumpod, J. (2022). Instructional Leadership Practices Among Headmasters and The Correlation with Primary Schools’ Achievement in Sabah, Malaysia. English Language Teaching , 15 (2), 50. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v15n2p50 Syabarrudin, A., Eliyana, A., & Naimah, J. (2020). -Efficacy Drive their Organizational Commitment ? Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy 11 (4), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.31838/srp.2020.4.21 Syamil, A., & Rahim, A. (2025). Teacher’s Organizational Commitment And Strategic Planning Practices IN TS25 schools in Kubang Pasu District Journal of Advanced Social Educational Development Discovery 1 (1), 14–22. Tadesse, E. F. (2019). Teachers’ organizational commitment at secondary school in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia International Journal of Education and Research , 7 (4), 55-68. Taimin, J., & Kim, N. G. (2025). A Conceptual Paper on the Relationship between Instructional Leadership and Teacher Organisational Commitment. IX (2454), 186–198. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS Tatlah, I. A., Naeem Akhtar, S., & Hashmi, M. A. (2019). Effect of Instructional Leadership on Teachers’ Performance and Job Commitment: A Comparison of Public and Private Universities of Lahore. Journal of Educational Research, Dept. of Education, IUB , 22 (1), 133–144. Tessema, L. (2025). Examining principals ’ instructional leadership practices at the middle schools in Banja Woreda , Ethiopia Injibara Journal of Social Science and Business , 1(2) Thien, L. M., & Adams, D. (2021). Distributed leadership and teachers’ affective commitment to change in Malaysian primary schools: the contextual influence of gender and teaching experience. Educational Studies , 47 (2), 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1680349 Thien, L. M., Darmawan, I. N., & Adams, D. (2023). (Re)Investigating the pathways between instructional leadership, collective teacher efficacy, and teacher commitment: a multilevel analysis. International Journal of Educational Management , 37 (4), 830–845. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2022-0516 Tran, S. (2025). Teachers’ perception of principal instructional leadership practices in five accredited kindergartens run by DMI sisters in Vietnam. International Journal of Research Studies in Education , 14 (12), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2025.25221 Vivian, U. (2025). Influence of biology teachers’workload on their job satisfaction and stress level in secondary schools in Enugu education zone. Unizik Journal Of Educational Research, Science And Vocational Studies 1 (1), 20–30. Wayne K. Hoy, & M. (2008). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6th. In Journal of Educational Administration (Vol. 46, Issue 1). Welch, R., & Yang, R. (2011). A pearl on the silk road? Internationalizing a regional Chinese university. In The internationalization of East Asian higher education: Globalization’s impact (pp. 63-89). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8933-5 Yamane, T., Wyluda, B. J., & Shulman, R. G. (1967). Dihydrothymine from UV-irradiated DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 58 (2), 439–442. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.58.2.439 Yasser, F. H., Hendawy Al-Mahdy, A., & Al-Kiyumi, R. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions of principals’ instructional leadership in Omani schools. American Journal of Educational Research , 3 (12), 1504–1510. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-3-12-4 Zamani, M., Maidin, M., & Tumiran, M. A. (2024). A Review on Interconnection Concept of Teacher Commitment and Performance in Instructional Leadership. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2024.6.2.48 Zhan, Q., Wang, X., & Song, H. (2023). The relationship between principals’ instructional leadership and teacher retention in the undeveloped regions of central and western China: The chain-mediating role of role stress and affective commitment. Behavioral Sciences , 13 (9), 738 https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13090738 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Suplementary.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 07 May, 2026 Reviews received at journal 14 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 07 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 22 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 22 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 26 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 14 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 07 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 07 Feb, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 04 Feb, 2026 Editor invited by journal 07 Jan, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 02 Jan, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 30 Dec, 2025 First submitted to journal 30 Dec, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8378856","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":587406190,"identity":"c7591975-1a4b-4fd2-9c68-982a40f908ae","order_by":0,"name":"Mulugeta Abera","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Haramaya University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mulugeta","middleName":"","lastName":"Abera","suffix":""},{"id":587406191,"identity":"308bbb3c-8c65-4c03-a26a-394dcbd074e7","order_by":1,"name":"Befekadu Zeleke","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Addis Ababa University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Befekadu","middleName":"","lastName":"Zeleke","suffix":""},{"id":587406192,"identity":"8d109edc-fb15-4770-b582-bf838ebc2dc8","order_by":2,"name":"Million Kebede","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Haramaya University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Million","middleName":"","lastName":"Kebede","suffix":""},{"id":587406193,"identity":"ca71fdbb-e835-4a0c-928b-2311183d6723","order_by":3,"name":"Tadesse Hailu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Haramaya University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tadesse","middleName":"","lastName":"Hailu","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-12-16 17:53:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8378856/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8378856/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":102312217,"identity":"9db808e5-9056-4954-9933-9cdf9b971336","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-10 12:00:49","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":69753,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eConceptual framework of the study\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8378856/v1/46a0fac88058f84082eea13f.png"},{"id":102745609,"identity":"96361a80-c641-491d-850e-27e3e1b6224a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-16 08:52:43","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1463443,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8378856/v1/cf6c2954-416d-46cf-b5e1-0de293e87990.pdf"},{"id":102312256,"identity":"33663f93-b18d-458c-99fc-4b2d396aae58","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-10 12:00:58","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":950576,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Suplementary.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8378856/v1/f9453582d35888ff281f2230.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools of east Hararghe zone, Oromia national regional state, Ethiopia.","fulltext":[{"header":"1.\tIntroduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe role of school principals, as instructional leaders, plays a crucial role in influencing the educational environment and shaping\u0026nbsp;teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and commitment are critical for delivering quality education to students and has been widely studied in educational research. This study examines the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction \u0026amp; commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe success of any organization depends on the quality of its leadership (Adan, 2025). Various leadership styles impact teachers\u0026rsquo; attitudinal outcomes such as affective commitment, job satisfaction, employment engagement, and organizational commitment (Hoch et al., 2018). According to Khan \u0026amp; Gupta, (2025); Smith, (2025), the instructional leadership style is the most common that dramatically enhances teachers\u0026apos; job satisfaction and commitment compared to other leadership styles. In view of this, Gabion, (2025) noted that effective instructional leadership practices, such as promoting collaboration, providing constructive feedback, and supporting professional growth, create a more positive and fulfilling work environment, significantly impacts teacher job satisfaction \u0026amp; commitment. This was supported by Adan, (2025) study conducted in Somalia indicated that the leadership style of the principal significantly predicted teacher job satisfaction, conversely, teachers with high job satisfaction are more likely to exhibit stronger commitment to their work and the organization.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to instructional leadership, the foundation for a better-educated society is ultimately built upon teachers\u0026apos; devotion, flexibility, and commitment to students\u0026apos; development (Shiferaw \u0026amp; Ph, 2025). In many respects, teachers are essential to providing high-quality education (Abu, 2023). Teachers are crucial and fundamental players in enhancing school effectiveness because they have actual strength for producing quality students during teaching and learning practices (Ministry of Education, 2013). Ensuring high quality of teaching practice is a vital demand for academic achievement of students in schools (Kim \u0026amp; Lee, 2025). The quality of teaching practices can make a difference for the school success besides improving student learning. Since teaching practices are associated with various professional activities of teachers within schools, it is fundamental for the teachers to be committed within schools to pay full concentrations on improving student outcomes (Park, 2025). Moreover, the highly committed teachers are capable of improving student academic performance and transforming the schools into excellent schools (Syamil \u0026amp; Rahim, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTherefore, further research needed on the relationship between instructional leadership styles, teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and commitment. However, a few studies examined the relationship between instructional leadership styles and commitment \u0026amp; found that leadership styles teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment have significant, positive \u0026amp; negative relationship, (for instance, Sucitra et al., (2024) revealed that leadership styles of principals and teachers commitment have a positive and statistically significant relationship. Yet, Khan et al. (2020) also found that effective instructional leadership enhances teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment, which in turn positively impacts student outcomes. Cansoy et al. (2022) also noted that the behavior of school principals plays a crucial role in fostering teacher commitment. Instructional leadership styles of principals have a strong and significant relationship with teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlobally, despite its critical role in achieving educational objectives, teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and commitment remains a significant challenge especially in developing countries such as Ethiopia and is an international problem affecting many schools (Ingersoll, 2020). High rates of teacher turnover, low morale, and declining instructional effectiveness undermine school continue to performance and educational quality (Quiroz, 2021; Alemu, 2024; Kumar, 2024). Various studies across the globe have shockingly revealed a very low level of teacher job satisfaction. In a UNESCO\u0026rsquo;s study conducted across the globe, only 8.6% of the teachers were satisfied while 58.1% wanted to quit teaching (Muga, 2022). In developed countries especially in USA, 50% of secondary school teachers were not satisfied 25% intending to quit within a year due to poor working conditions (Mugazi, 2022). In developing nations the situation is grave with a survey on the majority of education unions (60 %) of teachers in Africa revealed that attrition rate of primary teachers was 44% which created serious shortages of teachers (Sahabi, 2022).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoreover, recent empirical studies conducted within Ethiopian schools underscore the direct link between school leadership and teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment. Research by Bekalu and colleagues found that a positive correlation between school leadership styles and teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment (Bekalu et al.,, 2016). According to Fenot (2005) as cited in Bekalu et al., (2016), noted that in primary schools nearly two-thirds of teachers (64.7%) have tentative or definite plan to leave the profession, 50 % of these indicated that they will continue teaching until they get another job, 14.2% stated they definitely plan to leave teaching, less than 23.3% intend to remain in the profession until retirement.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite the recognized importance of school principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership, many government secondary schools\u0026nbsp;context in Ethiopia face challenges related to teacher dissatisfaction and low commitment levels. Issues such as inadequate leadership support, poor working conditions, and limited career growth opportunities contribute to teacher attrition, negatively impacting student learning. Addressing these gaps is vital for contextualizing global insights and refining Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s education policies. \u0026nbsp;Therefore, the researcher is highly motivated to address this knowledge, methodological and contextual research gap by examining the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and commitment in secondary schools of East Hararghe zone. The problem formulation of this study is as follows.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Questions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWhat is the current status of instructional leadership style used by principals of secondary schools in East Hararghe Zone?\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWhat is the current status of teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment in the secondary schools of East Hararghe Zone?\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAre there statistically significant relationships between instructional leadership styles, teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment in secondary schools of East Hararghe Zone?\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"2.\tLiterature review","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstructional leadership\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile there is no single standard definition for the term instructional leadership, scholars have attempted to define it in diverse ways since 1980s. Hoy (2008) stated that instructional leadership is when a school principal oversees curriculum and instruction. This term originated from studies related to the 1980s effective school movement, which found that the role of principals is crucial to the operation of successful schools (Gumus et al., 2021). Noor and Nawab (2022) stated that “instructional leadership is a complex process, which differs across settings, based on individual style, school context, and constituents”. Moreover, Shaked, (2024) have explained the concept of instructional leadership refers to a school leadership approach that emphasizes the principal’s responsibility for improving the quality of teaching and learning. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe principal or other school leader actively shapes curriculum development, instructional strategies, and teacher professional development (Hallinger et al., 2015). Munna (2023)Jalidar and Alias (2024) concluded that instructional leadership is a set of behaviors that are taught with a clear purpose to influence, guide, teach, and give encouragement to teachers in an effort to improve and complete programs related to the learning process of students, with the goal achieve each set school objective\u003csup\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eAdditionally, they promote a collaborative environment where teachers are inspired to grow and improve their skills\u0026nbsp;(Chayomchai, 2024). Because they place a high priority on student achievement and foster an environment of excellence, instructional leaders play a crucial role in fostering educational success.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOrganizational Commitment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOrganizational commitment has been defined differently by different scholars (Allen and Meyer, 1990). Early studies relate organizational commitment with attitudinal or behavioral conceptualizations (Allen and Meyer, 1990). There are many definitions of organizational commitment as developed by researchers with respect to their areas of interest (Rotimi, 2019). For instance, Syabarrudin et al., (2020) and Neziri (2021) view organizational commitment as employees’ orientation towards their organization with respect to their loyalty, identification and involvement in organizational system and activities.\u0026nbsp;Organizational commitment can be defined as the extent to which an employee will experience a sense of community with their organization\u0026nbsp;(Nazim et al., 2023). Organizational commitment is also a condition of employees who side with certain organizations and their goals, as well as the intention to maintain their membership in the company\u0026nbsp;(Purnomo et al., 2020).\u0026nbsp;In other words, organizational commitment will be related to the high desire of employees to share and sacrifice for the company.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;In similar vein,\u0026nbsp;Khan et al., (2020)\u0026nbsp;opine that organizational commitment is the degree to which an employee willingly maintains his or her membership in an organization and the acceptance of organization’s goals and values. For the purpose of this study, organizational commitment is defined as the extent or degree of teacher’s alignment and complete acceptance of schools goals and values, which culminated in his or her persistent loyalty, identification and involvement in school activities.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeyer et al., (1993) explain the varying antecedents for each dimension. A precursor to affective commitment is work experiences that encourage an employee to feel comfortable and competent. Normative commitment is preceded by feelings of loyalty learned through the individual’s experiences of familial, cultural, and organizational socialization. An antecedent of continuance commitment is the individual’s realization of the costs of leaving the organization and determining them to be too great. Personal characteristics are also antecedents of the three dimensions of commitment (Meyer et al., 1993).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAffective commitment (Emotional):\u003c/strong\u003e refers to the employees’ identification with, involvement in, and sentimental attachment to their organizations (Allen and Meyer, 1990). According to Zamani et al., (2024) it also conveys the extent to which employees become psychologically attached with the organizations through various feelings (e.g., loyalty, affection, warmth, belongingness, fondness, happiness, and pleasure. In the context of teachers, this could relate to the passion they will develop for teaching and the emotional connection they will build with the institution they will work for (Thien and Adams, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eContinuance commitment:\u003c/strong\u003e has to do with the degree to which employee perceives the associated cost of leaving the organization for another (Meyer et al., 2002a). Employees in this category are not willing to lose membership of their organization because of the economic and social importance attached such as losing relationship with old time friends \u0026amp; colleagues; forfeiting accrued salaries, pension benefits and promotion. For teachers, this will involve factors such as the financial implications of switching careers or the challenges of securing a new teaching position (Aslan, 2022).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNormative commitment:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eis the employees’ sense of loyalty or obligation to remain with their organization irrespective of the circumstance whether good or bad. Employees in this category might find it difficult to leave their organization even if they are no longer comfortable with job role (Kaya et al., 2024). This occurs mostly when the organization has invested in an employee through quality training while such employee are equally willing to reciprocate by staying or remaining with their organization overtime (Bashir and Gani, 2020). Understanding how these components will operate within the educational field will help secondary schools identify the causes of low retention among teachers and devise effective solutions to address these challenges (Neziri, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe three dimensions share the correlates of job satisfaction, job involvement, and occupational commitment. These variables are considered correlates because there is not sufficient evidence to claim a causal relationship. Job satisfaction, job involvement, and occupational commitment have an “affective” tone, but they can be distinguished from affective commitment and are considered correlates of organizational commitment in general (Meyer et al., 2002).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstructional leadership and Teacher organizational Commitment\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrincipal’s leadership style plays significant role in the smooth running of educational system. Its role cannot be denied in enhancing teacher’s commitment (Saleem, 2017). Relationship between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment has been explored in many research studies globally and locally with their direct and indirect impact on each other.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlobally, in USA, Skelton (2019) found that (a) teachers rated principals highest on the instructional leadership function of framing \u0026amp; communicating school goals, (b) teachers reported greater levels of organizational commitment when principals communicated school goals \u0026amp; (c) years of teaching experience, school context, school size, or grade level teaching did not affect teachers commitment. In China, Zhan et al., (2023) found that principals’ instructional leadership has direct effect on teacher retention \u0026amp; indirect effects: through the separate mediating role of role stress, the separate mediating role of affective commitment \u0026amp; the chain-mediating role of affective commitment. In Turkey, Cansoy et al., (2022) conducted a research study in Turkey that examined the relationship between school principals’ instructional leadership styles with teacher’s organizational commitment found that significant relationship between instructional leadership and teachers’ commitment. Similarly, Kiral \u0026amp; Suçi̇çeği̇, (2017) conducted research in Turkish context and investigated the way by which principals’ instructional leadership behaviors influence teachers’ organizational commitment in schools found a significant positive correlation between these two instructional leadership practices and teachers commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn Indonesia, a comprehensive examination of the impact of instructional leadership provided by school principals on teacher commitment by Sucitra et al., (2024) found that instructional leadership style of school principals and the resulting organizational commitment has a positive and statistically significant, effect on teacher organizational commitment. Similarly, Harahap and Suriansyah (2019),\u0026nbsp;Nellitawati et al., (2024)\u0026nbsp;found that the principal's instructional leadership contributed 7.8% to improving teacher performance, while work commitment contributed 22.5%. When these two variables were combined, they explained 23.1% of the variability in teacher performance \u0026amp; instructional leadership \u0026amp; high work commitment in improving teacher performance. Yet,\u0026nbsp;Habibi, (2025)\u0026nbsp;conducted a study that explored the impact of instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, professional commitment and school climate on job satisfaction and performance among Indonesian secondary teachers. The findings revealed that teacher self-efficacy significantly enhanced commitment and the school climate, with the most substantial relationships observed in this study.\u0026nbsp;In India Nanjundeswaraswamy (2023)identified the association between leadership styles\u0026nbsp;\u0026amp; commitment mediated by job satisfaction in India found that job satisfaction partially mediates the relationship between leadership styles \u0026amp; employee commitment. In Pakistan\u0026nbsp;Saleem, (2017)\u0026nbsp;study relationship between principals’ leadership styles \u0026amp; teachers’ commitment found that there was significantly \u0026amp; positively moderate relationship between principal’s leadership styles \u0026amp; teachers’ commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the African context, numerous studies have explored the relationship between leadership styles \u0026amp; employee commitment. In Nigeria, Oyewobi (2022) explored the relationship between three primary constructs: leadership styles \u0026amp; organizational commitment among private-practice found a positive indirect link between leadership styles and organizational commitments, In Tanzania, Nyenyembe et al., (2016) investigated the influence of leadership style, and job satisfaction on organizational commitment found that leadership styles is the predictor of organizational commitment with 49.7% variance is explained; while with job performance, 34.8% of variance explained. Similarly,\u0026nbsp;Mgaiwa (2023)\u0026nbsp;found that perceived leadership styles statistically significantly related to academics’ staff commitment \u0026amp; above their marital status, gender, age \u0026amp; institutional type. In Uganda\u0026nbsp;Bratnicka (2015)\u0026nbsp;investigated the effect of principals’ leadership styles on the commitment of teachers found that democratic, autocratic \u0026amp; laissez-faire had a positive \u0026amp; significant influence on commitment of teachers.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn Ethiopia, Tekle and Solomon (2016) investigated the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment in terms of academic staff at Arba Minch University found that, employees were fund to be most satisfied the relationship that they have with their coworkers, nature of the work \u0026amp; communication \u0026amp; lest satisfied with pay they receive \u0026amp; promotion; and they enjoy average level of overall job satisfaction. Similarly, Getahun (2022) examined the relationship between leadership styles of principals, and teachers’ commitment found that, democratic style has inverse relation with affective commitment, but laissez-faire showed positive relation with affective commitment, while autocratic leadership showed no relationship with affective commitment. However, both democratic \u0026amp; autocratic showed positive relation with normative \u0026amp; continuance commitment of teachers; but laissez-faire has no relation on continuance but inverse relation with normative commitment. Mesfin (2023) examined the perceived relationship between principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ commitment in Ethiopia found that the transactional leadership style was predominantly practiced in Ethiopian secondary schools \u0026amp; transactional \u0026amp; transformational leadership styles had positive \u0026amp; statistically significant relationships with teachers’ commitment. Laissez-faire leadership style was found to be negatively related to teachers’ normative commitment.\u0026nbsp;Geda (2015)\u0026nbsp;examine the impact of secondary school principals leadership behavior on teachers commitment in Adama city administration of Oromia region, Ethiopia found a significantly positive correlation between leadership styles and teachers commitment, he also noted that almost all school principals were from non-management or leadership educational background, they lack knowhow on how to influence and get teachers to perform beyond expectation, develop sense of school citizenship and work for unifying purpose. \u0026nbsp;Dea Lerra, (2021)\u0026nbsp;assessed the link and effect of leadership style on teachers' commitment in secondary schools in Wolaita Zone, SNNPR, Ethiopia, revealed that there was positive correlation between transformational leadership and teachers' commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTigist et al., (2023) explored the link between school principals’ transformational leadership style to teachers’ organizational commitment in Addis Ababa government secondary schools found that transformational leadership is less practiced in Addis Ababa government secondary schools. The study further reveals that transformational leadership is positively and significantly related to teachers’ organizational commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs clearly mentioned above, instructional leadership style of principals has a significant impact on teachers’ commitment to their school. Thus, secondary school principals should use the right leadership techniques to encourage teachers to be committed to their school, students and teaching profession. As clearly mentioned above, worldwide research has shown that instructional leadership style of principals has meaningfully a significant correlation with teachers’ commitment to their school (e.g., Abdullah et al., 2018; Skelton 2019; Hallinger \u0026amp; Hosseingholizadeh, 2018; Tahir \u0026amp; Noor Fatima, 2023; Sucitra et al., 2024); . However, this relationship remains unexplored in the context of secondary schools in east Hararghe zone, Oromia, Ethiopia. To address this gap, the present study aims to investigate the potential link between instructional leadership and teachers’ organizational commitment in east Hararghe zone secondary schools,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col start=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cli id=\"_Toc514680775\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConceptual Framework of the Study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdom et al., (2018), define the conceptual framework as a visual or written product that explains in the form of a narration; graph of what is to be studied as the main factor. Leshem \u0026amp; Trafford, (2007) offer that conceptual frameworks serve the purpose of providing theoretical amplification of what the study wants to investigate and allow readers understand the objectives of the research and how these will be achieved. This Conceptual framework was developed based on literature and findings from different researchers. It was mainly based on Bass \u0026amp; Riggio, (2005) and others’ writings that leadership style influences organizational commitment. In view of the above study, the self-made model was constructed to explain the relationship among leadership style, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. It is divided into independent and dependent variables: independent variable is instructional leadership style whereas the dependent variables teachers’ commitment dimensions (affective, continuance and normative) as shown in figure 1 below.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe model shows that three dimensions of instructional leadership styles are related to teacher’s organizational commitment facets. It is assumed that each of the three dimensions of instructional leadership (defining the school mission, managing the instructional programs and promoting a positive school learning climate) relates to the three (affective, normative and continuance commitment) of teachers commitment facets.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. MATERIALS AND METHODS","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.1.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Research Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResearch design can be regarded as the general plan for conducting a research, which is the procedure involved in data collection, analysis and report writing (Creswell, 2009). It \u0026nbsp; refers to the procedural framework within which the research is conducted (Jilcha, 2019). Research design is characterized by procedures and methods for arriving at results and findings and tools for proving or disproving such, knowledge (Patel \u0026amp; Patel, 2019). Gardner (2018) three categories of quantitative research design include descriptive, correlational, and causal. This study adopted a correlational research design. In a correlational research design, data is gathered from study participants at a particular point in time to provide a snapshot of the current conditions in regard to the studied variable (Kato, 2023). In this study, data from teachers and principals were collected at once with the aid of questionnaire as a data collection instrument. Further, correlational research design was chosen because it permitted data collection utilizing a self-administered questionnaire that enabled the researcher to reach a sizable number of teachers (Gardner, 2018). It also aided the acquisition of useful data in a relatively short period thus, saving time and cost to have the study accomplished. A correlational research design refers to a quantitative research where two or more quantitative variables are related to determine if there is a relationship between them (Kato, 2023). Utilizing this type of a research design, relationships between and among a number of variables is sought and interpreted (Creswell, 2009)). Thus, using a correlational research design, relationships between leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment were established (Welch, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe quantitative research approach was used for this investigation. In a quantitative research approach, numerical data was utilized and analyzed using statistical methods to address the research question that was examined (Park et al. 2020). The research used this approach because the data collected using the main questionnaire was quantitative which was analyzed using statistics. The study collected quantitative data that was numerically analyzed with statistical procedures to make generalization. The statistical procedures used to analyses data were descriptive and inferential statistics. This helped to draw inferences on the variables under study. The quantitative research approach was adopted because the study was guided by the positivist research philosophy which aimed at establishing the objective reality in relation to the study variables.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePopulation, Sample, and Sampling Techniques\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA population which is made of individuals with shared identifiable features Creswell, (2014), this research focused on the 54 government secondary schools in the East Hararghe Zone, which have a student population of 2258 teachers and 132 principals as of 2025 in the Oromia Regional State. \u0026nbsp;According to Okwisa (2023) a sample is a set of relatively smaller number of individuals selected from a population for research purposes. According to Bhalerao and Kadam (2010) a sample size is basically the number of participants or individuals in a sample. The current study was employed three sampling techniques, namely: stratified, purposive and simple random sampling techniques. Firstly, the researcher was used stratified sampling technique to categorize government secondary schools in East Hararghe zone into two (2) sub-groups (pastoral and non-pastoral) to make the schools more homogeneous, and this stratified sampling may results in more reliable and detailed information based on the size of their staff, geographical location and economic status. According to Creswell (2014) stratified sampling involves dividing the total population into subgroups or strata based on common characteristics. The study uses stratified sampling technique because it enable the researcher to ensure that each stratum of the target population will proportionately represent in the sample for the study (Akpan et al., 2023). After the stratification, the researcher was used \u0026nbsp;Yamane et al., (1967) and Cochran, (1977) correction formula assuming 95% confidence level, for determining representative sample size from each stratum.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs calculated by Yamane et al., (1967) and Cochran, (1977) correction formula, from the first stratum 4 sample secondary schools and from the second stratum 20 sample secondary schools were sampled. Secondly, the 24 sample secondary schools were selected using simple random sampling technique. To select teachers \u0026nbsp;from 24 sample secondary schools, the researcher was also used simple random sampling technique from each stratum (4 from pastoral and 20 from non-pastoral) secondary schools and 358 teachers (69 from pastoral and 289 from non-pastoral) , resulting in a total of 358 teachers to participate in the study. Finally, the researcher was used purposive sampling technique to select principals from the sampled secondary schools. Therefore, in the sampled secondary schools, there are 62 principals. Since they are manageable size the researcher was included all principals using purposive sampling technique.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Collection Tools\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA quantitative research approach using a correlation design was used to examine the relationship between variables in order to adequately answer the fundamental questions (Y. Cohen et al., 2018). In order to gather pertinent information regarding instructional leadership styles and teachers' commitment secondary school, principals and teachers were chosen as the main data source. For the current quantitative research, the researchers were used two sets closed-ended questionnaire as the main data gathering tool to collect data from the total of 420 respondents.\u0026nbsp;This instrument is fit for this purpose Cohen et al, (2007) as the study was followed the quantitative research approach.\u0026nbsp;The first part consists of fifty-items, divided under the three sub-variables to measure school principals as an independent variable adapted by permission from Hallinger and Murphy, (1985). The \u0026nbsp;second\u0026nbsp;part of the questionnaire was adapted by permission from the 18-item scale developed by Meyer and Allen (2004) to measure teachers commitment. Questionnaires were distributed to 420 respondents (358 teachers and 62 school principals).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe first questionnaire the researchers used was Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale PIMRS to measure school principal’s leadership style. The PIMRS Teacher-Form and principal-form questionnaire is consists of 50 items within its three dimensions of ten functions (Hallinger, 2015 and Al-Mahdy et al., 2018), established and validated by Hallinger and Murphy, (1985) to evaluate instructional leadership practices of school principals. PIMRS measures leadership behaviors focused on improving teaching, learning, and school climate as it is identified as a validated and commonly used instrument. More than 200 studies spanning 26 countries (Hallinger \u0026amp; Lee, 2013) have used this scale and acknowledged it a leading model to evaluate how principals set educational goals and institutional environments (Hallinger et al., 2015: Imran et al., 2025). This instrument has also been used by OECD to assess principals’ effectiveness (Bellibaş, 2016). In the current study, data was collected using a 5-point Likert scale.\u0026nbsp;Item response categories ranged from\u0026nbsp;1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). The instrument was scored by calculating the mean for the items that comprises each subscale and this resulted in a profile that portrays perceptions of principal and teachers on each instructional leadership function, it was validated by developer and previous researchers,\u0026nbsp;Hallinger and Murphy (1985)\u0026nbsp;reported that the PIMRS questionnaire was a valid for measuring principal instructional leadership,\u0026nbsp;Imran et al., (2025)\u0026nbsp;found high internal reliability, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.979 of the instrument. permission \u0026nbsp;to \u0026nbsp; use \u0026nbsp;the \u0026nbsp;instrument \u0026nbsp; was \u0026nbsp;obtained \u0026nbsp;from \u0026nbsp; the original \u0026nbsp;authors, (PIMRS) website\u0026nbsp;(Hallinger and Murphy, 1985). It was used for research question number 1.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe second questionnaire used to collect data on teachers’ organizational commitment variables was developed by Meyer and Allen (Meyer \u0026amp; Allen, 1991). For this study the researcher was used the revised version 18-item TCM commitment survey questionnaire. The TCM scale includes six items for each subscale, generating a composite score based on 18 items (6 for measuring each dimension: affective, normative, and continuance) developed by Allen and Meyer (1990) Meyer et al., (1993) and Meyer and Allen (2004), with modification to suit the purpose and content of the study, permission \u0026nbsp;to \u0026nbsp;use \u0026nbsp; the \u0026nbsp;instrument was obtained from the original authors, the TCM employee commitment website.. The survey scale was rated in a 5-point Likert agreement scale, where “1” represents “strongly disagree \u0026amp; “5” for “strongly agree.” The reliability of the TCM as estimated by Meyer and Allen (1990), reported a reliability (alpha) of 0.87 for affective, 0.75 for continuance, 0.79 for normative, and 0.80 for the reliability of the total commitment scale. Similarly, Emiru and Gedifew (2024) were found 0.79, 0.73 and 0.85 for continuance, normative \u0026amp; affective subscales. Recently, a similar questionnaire was also used in the Ethiopian context by Tigist, (2024) for the same purpose and tested the reliability of the instrument found the alpha coefficients of three components were found: (0.87) for affective commitment, (0.75) for continuance commitment, and (0.79) for normative commitment found it reliable and valid. All these alpha value measures were acceptable to use for the study. This is because Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) as cited in Dawit and Endris (2019) clearly indicated that a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of \u0026nbsp; 0.70 and above is an acceptable level of internal consistency used for research question number 3. Since all of these questionnaires originally in English, while the respondents of this study are also more comfortable with English language, the researcher was used the original questionnaire as it is.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to the primary survey questions, there are demographic items asking respondents about their position (for leaders), age, gender, working experience, education level, and school. This information helped researchers to understand the respondents’ backgrounds. The researchers considered relevant ethical considerations such as explaining the objectives and significance of the study to obtain consent from selected respondents, encouraging them to participate voluntarily, and ensuring confidentiality by making sure that any information they provide is used primarily for the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFirst of all, the researcher was checked the collected data through data cleaning of the filled questionnaire to identify valid responses and to remove the invalid ones. Data collected from respondents were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential data analysis. Descriptive statistics include frequencies, measure of standard deviation, measures of central tendency (means, modes, and medians), cross tabulations and standardized scores \u0026nbsp;(Y. Cohen et al., 2018). \u0026nbsp;In this study, descriptive data includes frequencies, percentages, mean, and standard deviation. Descriptive data will be (a) age (b) gender and (c) year of study and the current status of instructional leadership style, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. Descriptive statistics is conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 to perform means and standard deviations along with reliability statistics for sub-constructs of instructional leadership (creating a school mission, managing the instructional program, and developing a positive school learning climate); teachers’\u0026nbsp;job satisfaction (intrinsic, and extrinsic) and teacher commitment (affective, continuance and normative) were calculated and reported for research question 1 and 2.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong the inferential statistics the Pearson-r correlation coefficient was employed to examine the relationship between the variables in secondary schools for basic questions 4. Pearson-r correlation coefficient was employed to examine the existence, strength, and direction of the relationship between instructional leadership styles,\u0026nbsp;teachers’\u0026nbsp;job satisfaction, and commitment sub-variables (facets). The coefficient of correlation tells us about the relations between two variables and there are three levels of correlations between the variables. It is said to have a range that is between -1 to +1, with + 1 showing a perfect positive correlation, while -1 reflects a perfectly negative one, and finally a value of zero is said not to exist any correlation at all. The sign which could either be negative or positive is an indicator of the direction of change within the variable relationships. \u0026nbsp;Classifications of magnitude of correlation interpretation like: less than 0.35 shows a weak relationship exists; between 0.35 and 0.65 moderate level relationship and from 0.65 to 1.00 indicates a strong relationship exists (Y. Cohen et al., 2018). Therefore for the purpose of this study this standard was used as reference. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 is used to examine the values of Pearson correlation for sub-constructions of instructional leadership, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. Previous researchers such as Donald, (2016), Beevor, (2023), Shaari et al., (2022), Ardo et al., (2024), Marie et al., (2025), were utilized this method, and \u0026nbsp;locally in an Ethiopian setting. Burichaw et al., (2016), Tekle \u0026amp; Solomon, (2016), \u0026nbsp;used Pearson r to analyze the data on the local context, and Endale, (2019), Lima et al., (2021) also used the mean and correlation to analyze the data.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBesides, inferential statistics were employed, such as linear and multiple regression analysis to see which independent variable predicted the dependent variable and the link between the outcome variable and one or more predictors. This analysis shows not only the relationship between variables but also the degree to which the link occurred and determines which independent variable predicts the dependent variable. The linear regression is used to see the link between one independent variable and one dependent variable, for instance, to see the influence of leadership style on job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Gay et al., 2012). The multiple regressions were used to analyze one dependent variable and multiple independent variables. For instance, the influence of three instructional leadership style dimensions on teachers’ job satisfaction as well as organizational commitment to support one of the current basic research questions 4. In this study, multiple linear regressions were employed to support one of the current research question that attempts to examine how the independent variable (instructional leadership to predict teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment were statistically estimated. The adjusted R² values were examined to indicate the percentage of variances in teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment explained by instructional leadership. This was used for research question number 3.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescriptive Statistics Results\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics are used to describe the basic features of the data in a study. Creswell (2014) asserts that, descriptive statistics provide simple summaries about the sample and the measures through mean, standard deviation, mode and median. Furthermore, together with simple graphics analysis, they form the basis of virtually every quantitative analysis of data. This study used descriptive statistics to present the mean and standard deviation of the gathered data on the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment in government secondary schools of East Hararghe zone. The study adopted a likert scale of 1-5 (1=strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral,4=Agree,5=Strongly Agree). The key variables rated by respondents included; instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. The broad objective of the study was to examine the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment of government secondary schools in East Hararghe zone. The style of school principals was tested by analyzing the relationship between each instructional leadership dimensions, teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment using quantitative analysis of data for the three instructional leadership dimensions; defining school mission, managing instructional program and developing positive school learning climate.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground characteristics of respondents\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis section presents demographic information of the respondents who participated in the study. The information included number of years teachers had served under the current head teacher and years of experience as trained teachers. This was to help the researcher ascertain whether the respondents had adequate knowledge of the head teacher’s leadership practices and to determine the extent to which their responses could be relied upon to make conclusions on the study problem. Accordingly, 420 questionnaires were distributed for secondary school teachers and principals out which 368 (87.6 %) were properly filled. On the other hand, 50 questionnaires were not returned, returned while not fully filled or returned completely blank. This represented a non-response rate of 11.9%. According to Kubai, (2023) a response rate of 50% is adequate, 60% good while 70% response rate is very good. This implies that the 87.6% response rate obtained in this study is adequate for analysis and making conclusions and recommendations of the study. In general, from the total distributed questionnaire 420, 368 (87.6%) of them were entered and analyzed using SPSS software.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table 1, the majority of principals were male (96.8%), the percentage of female principals was (3.2%). Similarly majority of teachers were male (90.2%), the percentage of female teachers was (9.8%). This shows that a significant gender disparity existed, with a much higher proportion of male and female school principals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"606\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1\u003c/strong\u003e: Frequency of Teachers and Principal According to their Gender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeachers \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Principals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Percent \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Frequency \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; percent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValid\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003emale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e276\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e96.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003efemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 presents results of teachers and principals’ frequency according to demographic characteristics of age. It is evident from the table that most of the teachers, 112 (36.6%) were between the ages of 26 to 30 years, 78 (25.5%) of them aged 31-35, 50 (16.3%) of them aged 36-40 years, 28 (9.2%) of them aged 20-25 and 38 (12.4%) of them were aged above 40 years. \u0026nbsp; Similarly the largest percentage of secondary school principals 28 (45.2%) were between the ages of 26 to 30, 26 (41.9%) principals were between 31-35 and 6 (9.7%) of principals were between 20-25 20 years age group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"606\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"8\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2\u003c/strong\u003e: Frequency of teachers and principal according to their age\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Teachers \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Principals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Frequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValid\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20-25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26-30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e140\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31-35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36-40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eabove 40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e368\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 represents result of teachers and principals’ distribution according to their teaching and administrative experience. Result shows that the largest percentage of secondary school teachers 76 (24.8%) reported they had more between 11 to 15 years of teaching experience. That percentage was closely followed by those teachers with above twenty of classroom teaching experience 70 (22.9%) years of experience 66 (21.6%) reported they had more between 16 to 20 years of teaching experience. \u0026nbsp;Similarly the largest percentage of secondary school principals 28 (45.2%) reported they had 5 to 10 years of administrative experience. 26 (41.9) principals had 11 to 15 administrative experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"606\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"8\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3\u003c/strong\u003e Frequency of Teachers and Principal According to their Working experience\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrincipals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValid\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ebelow 5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5-10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11-15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e102\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16-20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eabove 20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e368\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs indicated in Table 4, regarding educational qualification most of the teachers, 258 (84.3%) were degree holders. 48 (15.7%) of them have above first degree. Similarly the largest percentage of secondary school principals 56 (903%) were degree holders, 6 (9.7%) of them have above first degree. This might indicate that most of the teachers and principals are qualified to the level they are engaged as professionals and can provide adequate information to the research work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"606\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"8\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4\u003c/strong\u003e: Frequency of Teachers and Principal According to their Educational qualification\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrincipals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValid\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDegree\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e258\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e84.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e314\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eabove degree\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e368\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSelf-reported Result of school principals on their leadership style\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5: Descriptive Statistics of Principals’ Perceptions of their Instructional Leadership\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"582\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescriptive Statistics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMinimum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaximum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFraming the school goal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommunication the school goal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDefining the school mission \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e124\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSupervises and evaluates instruction\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCoordinates the curriculum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMonitor students’ progress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eManaging instructional program\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e186\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProtects instructional time\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaintains high visibility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProvides incentives for teachers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePromotes professional development\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProvides incentives for learning\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDeveloping positive school learning climate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall Mean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e620\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNote: N (list wise) = 62\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5 represents the descriptive statistics of Principals’ Perceptions of their Instructional Leadership. The means for principal responses ranged from a high of (M=3.74, SD=0.51) on the instructional leadership function of “Promotes professional development,” to a low of (M=2.42, SD=0.51) on the leadership function of “Provides incentives for learning.” The mean for both leadership dimensions of “defining the school mission” was the largest at (M=3.52, SD=0.51) which included framing the school goals and communicating school goals. The function of “framing the school goal” had a mean of (M=3.38, SD=1.32), and the function of “communicates the school goals” had a mean of (M=3.66, SD=1.22). On the dimension of “Managing instructional program,” two means were above 3.00, Supervises and evaluates instruction,\u0026nbsp;(M=3.66, SD=1.32),\u0026nbsp;and Monitoring students’ progress,\u0026nbsp;(M=3.12, SD=1.29).\u0026nbsp;Only one mean was below 3.00, and was on the instructional leadership functions of “coordinating the curriculum” (M=2.67, SD=1.17).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe instructional leadership dimension of “developing positive school learning climate” had the lowest mean of (M=3.14, SD=1.26). On the dimension of “developing the school program and learning climate,” three functions score a mean above (M=3.00), promotes professional development\u0026nbsp;(M=3.74, SD=1.02) providing incentives for teachers\u0026nbsp;(M=3.63, SD=1.01) and maintaining high visibility\u0026nbsp;(M=3.02, SD=1.35). The other two functions score a mean below (M=3.00), protecting instructional time (M=2.89, SD=1.43)\u0026nbsp;and providing incentives for learning\u0026nbsp;(M=2.42, SD=1.18),\u0026nbsp;but above the average mean score of\u0026nbsp;a 5-point likert scale. It should be noted that the instructional leadership dimensions of “defining the school mission” had a total mean of (M=3.52, SD=1.27), which was the highest mean of the three instructional leadership dimensions followed by managing instructional program\u0026nbsp;(M=3.15, SD=1.26) and developing positive school learning climate is the dimension with the lowest mean score among the three dimensions\u0026nbsp;(M=3.14, SD=1.24). Overall, the teachers’ ratings of principal instructional leadership practices ranged from 2.42 to 3.74, indicating relatively high perceptions across all dimensions.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe statistical findings further indicated that the principal’s practices in promoting professional development (M = 3.74, SD = 1.02), communication the school goal (M = 3.66, SD = 1.22), supervising and evaluating instruction (M = 3.66, SD = 1.32), and providing incentives for teachers (M = 3.63, SD = 1.01) received the highest mean ratings among the ten instructional leadership functions evaluated.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis result is also in line with a study conducted by These results align with the findings of Hallinger and Lee, (2014), Yasser et al., (2015), Kemal, (2016) Harris et al., (2019), Binti Si-Rajab et al., (2019), Simin Ghavifekr et al., (2019), \u0026nbsp;Bada et al., (2020), and Latif, (2021), Sultan et al., (2022), Thien et al., (2023) which indicated that the mean score of defining school mission had the highest of the three instructional leadership dimensions followed by the mean score of \u0026nbsp; managing instructional program and developing a positive school learning climate had the lowest mean score of the three dimensions.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, contrasting results were noted in the study by Ping and Mohd Hamzah, (2021), Sultan et al., (2022), Jeannette et al., (2023), Gechere et al., (2025), and Tran, (2025), which indicated that the mean score for developing a positive school learning climate had the highest mean score followed by managing instructional program and defining school mission had the lowest mean score of the three instructional leadership dimensions, and the results of the study by Legesse, (2025) which indicated that the mean score for managing instructional program had the highest mean score followed by defining school mission and developing a positive school learning climate had the lowest mean score of the three commitment dimension.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSelf-reported Result of teachers on their commitment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6: Descriptive Statistics of Teachers’ Perceptions of their commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"606\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Statistics\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMinimum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaximum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAffective teachers commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContinuance teachers commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNormative teachers commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNote: N (list wise) = 306\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6 represents the descriptive statistics for teachers’ commitment measured by the Three-Component Model (TCM) of teachers’ commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe mean and standard deviation values for each dimension in Table 6 showed that the extent of teachers organizational commitment. This data shows how teachers perception about three aspects of teachers commitment. The three dimensions of teachers’ commitment, concerning the mean score and SD for Affective commitment were 3.85 and 0.95, indicating that the teachers generally believes their Affective commitment to the school to be slightly higher than the average. Affective commitment refers to an individual's desired based connection and sense of belonging to the school. Teachers have some degrees of affective commitment compared to others. The mean score and standard deviation indicated for the teacher's normative commitment were 3.27 and 1.08, respectively, shows that teachers generally believe their normative commitment to be slightly higher than the average. Thus, the teachers have high level of commitment in secondary schools.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the three dimensions of teachers’ commitment, affective commitment shows relative highest mean scores than others. Affective commitment is characterized by a desire-based commitment to the organization. Regarding the mean score and SD of continuance commitment were 2.94 and 1.25, respectively. Continuance commitment refers to the expenses or sacrifices involved in resigning from the school. Teachers may experience perceived costs or sacrifices while leaving the organization, such as a loss of benefits or seniority. Teachers’ commitment is a combination of affective, normative, and continuance commitment. However, this shows that there were high levels of teachers in secondary schools. The results indicated that, affective commitment had the highest mean score (3.894). Affective commitment involves employee engagement with the organization on an emotional level. This was followed by normative commitment with a mean score of 3.27, and implies that teachers feel an obligation to their organization. In contrast with teachers’ level of affective commitment and normative commitment, the present study revealed that their continuance commitment, the consideration of the cost of leaving the organization is low (2.94). As a result, continuance commitments the least prevalent type of organizational commitment among secondary school teachers in the present study. It is expected that teachers with a low level of continuance commitment are less likely to leave their school or the profession.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccording to Meyer and Allen (1997) and Dunham et al., (1994), affective commitment generally has the highest score, followed by normative commitment, with continuance commitment representing the lowest score. The three commitment types should be viewed together as a commitment profile indicating that in the case of secondary schools, teachers have a strong affective and normative commitment profile (Meyer et al., 2012). When a strong affective commitment is combined with normative commitment, it can be experienced as a commitment to ‘do the right thing’ or as a strong sense of morality (Meyer et al., 2012;\u0026nbsp;Maiocco, 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis result is also in line with a study conducted by Bekalu et al., (2016), Maiocco, (2017), Dawit \u0026amp; Endris, (2019), Skelton, (2019),Tesfaye, (2021), Sukarmin and Sin, (2022)\u0026nbsp;which indicated that the mean score of teachers’ affective commitment had the highest of the three teachers commitment dimensions followed by the mean score of \u0026nbsp; teachers’ normative commitment and teachers’ continuance commitment had the lowest mean score of the three dimensions. Concerning this, the present study is very consistent with studies conducted by \u0026nbsp;Skelton, (2019)\u0026nbsp;among many others, there was a weak to moderate relationship between perceived affective and normative levels of organizational commitment and all functions of perceived instructional leadership of principals and the frequency with which principals were perceived to practice these functions of instructional leadership and higher levels of affective organizational commitment and normative organizational commitment were found to correlate with the instructional leadership functions of “defining school mission,”\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, contrasting results were noted in the study by Anderson, (2023), Mesfin, (2023), Bekele et al., (2025), which indicated that the mean score for normative commitment had the highest mean score followed by continuance commitment and affective commitment had the lowest mean score of the three commitment dimension, and the results of the study by Esponda-Pérez, (2024) which indicated that the mean score for continuance commitment had the highest mean score followed by normative commitment and affective commitment had the lowest mean score of the three commitment dimension and study by Endale, (2019) which indicated that the mean score for continuance commitment had the highest mean score followed by teachers' affective commitment and normative \u0026nbsp; commitment had the lowest mean score of the three teachers commitment dimension and Bekele et al., (2025) which indicated that the mean score for affective commitment had the highest mean score followed by teachers’ continuance commitment and normative teachers’ commitment had the lowest mean score of the three teachers’ commitment dimension. \u0026nbsp;According to \u0026nbsp; Irmayani et al., (2022), excellent work quality is the result of teachers' dedication, which is essential because commitment requires serious concentration from the teacher.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRelationship between instructional leadership style and teachers’ commitment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCorrelation analysis model was used to assess the influence of instructional leadership style of principals\u0026nbsp;on teachers’ commitment. The respondents were asked to indicate whether instructional leadership style of principals influenced teachers’ commitment. Pearson correlation analysis was used to test the type of relationship existing between instructional leadership style of principals and\u0026nbsp;teachers’ commitment. Table 7 shows the correlation between instructional leadership style of principals and\u0026nbsp;teachers’ commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 7: Relationship between instructional leadership style and teachers’ commitment (n = 306, p \u0026lt;0.05)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"570\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorrelations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eteachers’ commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInstructional leadership\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.795\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 7 portrays correlation coefficient between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ teachers commitment. Pearson’s correlation coefficient is .795 which is significant at .01 level of confidence. Result declares positive and significant correlation between instructional leadership style of principals and teachers commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis result is also in line with the study results conducted by Ail et al., (2015) which indicated that the relationship between instructional leadership and the level of teachers’ commitment is high. This result is also supported by the study results conducted by Sugandi et al., (2022), Qadarsih et al., (2023) which indicated that there was a significant and positive relationship between instructional leadership of school headmasters and work commitment, Similarly, Ahmasiyanto, Mahrita \u0026amp; Suriansyah, (2022) also found that there was a direct and indirect correlation between instructional leadership, work commitment. In addition, the findings of the literature review conducted by Sucitra et al., (2024) also revealed that the instructional leadership of school principals and the resulting organizational commitment have a positive, and statistically significant with teacher organizational commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurther, the results of study by Imran et al., (2025) also found that there was a positive correlation between instructional leadership and teachers commitment. Moreover, Zamani et al., (2024) found that there was a significant relationship between teacher commitment and instructional leadership. Likewise, Thien et al., (2023) also found that there is a direct relationship between instructional leadership and teacher commitment was significant at the school level. Khan et al., (2024) also found that teachers’ perceptions of creating a school mission implemented by the principal were significantly correlated with teacher commitment to school and teachers’ perceptions were also found positively and significantly correlated with teacher commitment to school. The study's findings of Khan et al., (2020) also support this findings which indicated that there is a significant and statistically positive \u0026nbsp;relationship between principals' instructional leadership and teacher's organizational commitment. The results of study by Ariansyah et al., (2022) also found a significant relationship between instructional leadership and work commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTaimin and Kim, (2025) reviewed and critically analyzed a total of 13 articles that focused exclusively on instructional leadership and teachers’ organizational commitment, indicated the relevance of investigating both constructs, but the inconsistent outcomes that show the level and strength of relationship between them, highlight significant gaps that requires further inquiry. Notably, while instructional leadership was rated highly, organizational commitment demonstrates variation, suggesting the influence of contextual, generational and definitional differences. Similarly, the result of research by Amri, (2024) indicates that the correlation coefficient values: instructional leadership (0.364), organizational culture (0.389), organizational commitment (0.376). The result research conclude that valid and reliable based on correlation coefficient value based on validator assessments of the instructional leadership, organizational culture, and organizational commitment variables at high school.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRelationship between instructional leadership style and\u0026nbsp;teachers’ commitment dimensions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUsing Pearson correlation analysis, the variation of data on instructional leadership style of principals and\u0026nbsp;teachers’ commitment dimensions was assessed. The respondents were asked to indicate whether instructional leadership style of principals\u0026nbsp;affected teachers’ commitment. Pearson correlation coefficient analysis was used to test the type of relationship existing between instructional leadership dimensions and teachers’ commitment dimensions. Table 8 shows the correlation between \u003cstrong\u003edimensions of\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003einstructional leadership style of principals and teachers’ commitment dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 8: Relationship between instructional leadership and teachers’ commitment (n = 306, p \u0026lt;0.05)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"961\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorrelations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDSM\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMIP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDPSLC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAffective commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.790\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.805\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.807\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContinuance commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.681\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.501\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.693\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNormative commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.769\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.714\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.741\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data in Table 8 portray the correlation between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers commitment. As the results of a two-tailed Pearson correlation in table 8 above indicated, the p-value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01) for defining school mission. This shows that there was statistically significant relationship between defining school mission and affective commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was .790**showing a high strength at 0.01 confidence level which is highly significant relationship between defining school mission and affective commitment. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 15, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01), showing significant relationship between defining school mission and normative commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.769** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. From the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 15, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01), showing significant relationship between defining school mission and continuance commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.681** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 8, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01), showing significant relationship between managing instructional program and affective commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.805** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. Furthermore, the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis indicated the significant relationship between managing instructional program and continuance commitment of the teachers as of the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01). The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.501** meaning the strength of relationship was moderate, positive and highly significant relationship.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 8, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01), showing significant relationship between managing instructional program and normative commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.714** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis in table 8, the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01), showing significant relationship between developing positive school learning climate and affective commitment. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.807** meaning the strength of relationship was high and highly significant relationship between the variables. Furthermore, the two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis indicated the significant relationship between developing positive school learning climate and continuance commitment of the teachers as of the p value was less than the alpha i.e. 0.00 (p\u0026lt; 0.01). The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.693** meaning the strength of relationship was high, positive and highly significant relationship.\u0026nbsp;The above table also depicted, the P-value i.e. 0.00 (p \u0026lt; 0.01) shows statistically significant relationship between developing positive school learning climate and normative commitment with high strength since the (r) value was 0.741** meaning the strength of relationship was high, positive and highly significant relationship.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsidering the outcome of the correlation analysis of all components of instructional leadership and affective, continuance and normative commitment, the results indicated instructional leadership (Defining the school mission, Managing instructional program and Developing positive school learning climate)accounted for the strongest linear relationships in affective, continuance and normative commitment. The positive normative commitment relationship indicates that government secondary school teachers working with instructional leaders have a perceived obligation to their organizations (Hosseingholizadeh et al., 2023; Sucitra et al., 2024)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of this study is consistent with the findings of similar studies like Mowday et al., (1979; Pierro et al., (2013); Duggal et al., (2018); \u0026nbsp;Khan et al., (2020); Latif, (2021); Cansoy et al., (2022); Nazim et al., (2023); Thien et al., (2023) and Imran et al., (2025) who found that a significant positive relationship between instructional leadership style and all dimensions of teachers commitment and suggested that instructional leadership is important to increased organizational commitment. The results of this study are consistent with the research findings by Baek et al., (2019) which indicated that there was a statistically significant relationship between instructional leadership dimensions and teachers commitment dimensions.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis result is in also in contrary to the findings of study by Skelton, (2019) which indicated that correlations between perceived continuance commitment of teachers and perceived dimensions and functions of instructional leadership of principals were very weak or no correlation. In addition Pvma, (2024) also found that the relationship between the dimensions of principals' instructional leadership practices (defining the school's mission managing instructional programs developing a positive school climate) and commitment also shows weak relationships. The findings of the study by Sarikaya, Nuray \u0026amp; Erdogan, (2016) revealed that the principals most display instructional leadership behaviors involved in the dimension of setting and sharing of school goals and least display the instructional leadership behaviors encompassed by the dimension of supporting and developing teachers.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.3.2.1.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Regression of instructional leadership styles and teachers’ commitment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo determine the influence of instructional leadership styles of principals have on teachers’ job satisfaction, a multiple linear regression model was fitted with defining school mission, managing instructional program and developing positive school learning climate as the independent variables. Regression analysis was conducted to test the relationship between instructional leadership styles (predictor variables) and teachers’ commitment (dependent variable). A multiple regression model was fitted to determine the combined relationship of leadership practices (defining school mission, managing instructional program, and developing positive school learning climate on teachers’ commitment).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 9: Model Summary for instructional leadership andteachers’ commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"969\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eModel Summary\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdjusted R Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Error of the Estimate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd height=\"51\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd height=\"51\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.989\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.979\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.979\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15665\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd height=\"23\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea. Predictors: (Constant), Developing school learning climate, Define school mission, Managing instructional program\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eb. Dependent Variable: Teachers commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 9 shows the summary of the regression analysis of principal leadership style and teachers’ commitment. It can be seen from the model that principal’s leadership style of secondary schools explained 0.979 percent of the variance in teachers’ commitment. In addition the beta weight is 0.989 which tells us that for every standard unit change in the principal’s leadership style the teachers’ commitment will raise by 98 percent of one standard unit. This shows that principal’s leadership style has a considerable impact on teachers’ commitment. This results also in line with the study by Somphors, (2025) who found that instructional leadership significantly predicted teacher commitment to teaching (Adjusted R² = 0.206, F(5, 613) = 33.026, p \u0026lt; 0.001) and commitment to school (Adjusted R² = 0.283, F(5, 613) = 49.683, p \u0026lt; 0.001). The results of multiple regression analysis by Cansoy et al., (2022) found that school principals’ instructional leadership significantly predicted teacher commitment (β = .57, p \u0026lt; .05) explained 33% of the variance in teacher commitment in Istanbul province of Turkey. The Nellitawati et al., (2024) research showed that the principal's instructional leadership contributed to improving teacher commitment 22.5%. A study of\u0026nbsp;Sukarmin \u0026amp; Sin, (2022)\u0026nbsp;also\u0026nbsp;found that instructional leadership is a significant predictor of teacher commitment to school (β = 0.397 Adjusted R2 = 0.154, t = 5.139, p = 0.001) whereby instructional leadership explains 15.4 percent of variances in teacher commitment to school in Indonesia.\u0026nbsp;Nazim et al., (2023)\u0026nbsp;found that instructional leadership has a direct positive and significant effect on organizational commitment as indicated by the results of the T-Statistic 87.320 and P-Values 0.000.\u0026nbsp;Khan et al., (2024)\u0026nbsp;found that the beta coefficients the adjusted R² value was 0.276 which indicates 27.6% of the variance in teacher commitment to school was explained by the model, both school mission (β =.31, p \u0026lt; .0001) and school learning climate (β =.26, p \u0026lt; .0001) were significant predictors of teacher commitment to the school. \u0026nbsp; The results of multiple regression analysis by\u0026nbsp;Cansoy et al., (2022)\u0026nbsp;supports the current result whose findings indicated that school principals’ instructional leadership behaviors could predict teacher commitment in Istanbul province of Turkey. This result is also in line with the results of study by\u0026nbsp;Tatlah et al., (2019)\u0026nbsp;conducted on the effect of instructional leadership on teachers’ performance and job commitmentin Pakistan which indicated that the results of F-test which supports the predictive utilities of instructional leadership on teachers’ job commitment. Whereas, R-square =.715, adjusted R-square =.518, and F = 62.3 is significant at p=0.000 with DF =1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe \u0026nbsp; research by Nellitawati et al., (2024) on the influence of instructional leadership and work commitment showed \u0026nbsp;that \u0026nbsp;the \u0026nbsp; principal's \u0026nbsp;instructional \u0026nbsp;leadership contributed \u0026nbsp;7.8% \u0026nbsp; to \u0026nbsp;improving \u0026nbsp;teacher \u0026nbsp; performance, \u0026nbsp;while \u0026nbsp;work \u0026nbsp; commitment \u0026nbsp;contributed \u0026nbsp;22.5%. \u0026nbsp; When these two variables were combined, they explained 23.1% of the variability in teacher performance. In a study by Keman et al., (2025) revealed that the headmaster’s leadership accounts for 42% of the teachers’ commitment. Meanwhile, teachers’ commitment, in turn, accounts for 41% of the success in instilling al-Hikmah values.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 10: Analysis of variance for\u0026nbsp;instructional leadership andteachers’ commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"536\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eANOVA\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegression\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.696\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.232\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4979.777\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResidual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.257\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e302\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.953\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e305\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea. Dependent Variable: Teachers commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eb. Predictors: (Constant), Developing school learning climate, Defining school mission, Managing instructional program\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnalysis of variance for regression tests the general significance of the regression model fitted. In a bivariate regression model with only one coefficient, the ANOVA tests whether the estimated coefficient is not equal to zero. Table 10 shows the ANOVA for the bivariate regression of instructional leadership on teachers’ commitment. As illustrated in p-value of the ANOVA, F-statistic was obtained as 0.000 which is less than 0.05. Therefore, the model is statistically significant in predicting the influence of defining school mission, managing instructional program and developing positive school learning climate on teachers’ commitment, implying that instructional leadership dimensions have a significant influence on teachers’ commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 11: Regression coefficients for instructional leadership and\u0026nbsp;teachers’ commitment\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"624\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCoefficients\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnstandardized Coefficients\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandardized Coefficients\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Error\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBeta\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Constant)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.024\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.006\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-4.245\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDefining school mission\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.501\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.026\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.457\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.142\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eManaging instructional program\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.065\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.057\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.070\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.137\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.256\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDeveloping school learning climate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.472\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.057\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.480\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.231\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ea. Dependent Variable: Teachers commitment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData in Table 11 illustrates how leadership styles predict teachers’ commitment. For Defining the school mission dimension, the Beta coefficient is 0.457 (p\u0026lt;0.05), which means that for every standard deviation increase in Defining the school mission, teachers commitment increases by (45.7%). For Managing instructional program, the standardized Beta coefficient is 0.070 (p\u0026lt;0.05), which means that for every standard deviation increase in Managing instructional program, teachers’ commitment increases by (7.0%). For\u0026nbsp;Developing school learning climate, the standardized Beta coefficient is 0.480 (p\u0026lt;0.05), which means that for every standard deviation increase in\u0026nbsp;Developing school learning climate, teachers’ commitment increases by (48.0%).This result is also supported by the results of study by Khan et al., (2024) which employed simultaneous multiple regression to examine the best predictors of teacher commitment to school, \u0026nbsp;the combination of variables to predict teacher commitment to school from sub-constructs of instructional leadership namely creating school mission and school learning climate was statistically significant F(2, 616) = 118.52, p \u0026lt; .0001). Similarly, the results of study by Sucitra, Hariri, Riswandi, et al., (2024) also found that the direct effect of instructional leadership on job satisfaction was 32.2%. The direct effect of job satisfaction on organizational commitment was 17.6%. The direct effect of instructional leadership on organizational commitment was 30.6%. Furthermore, the indirect effect of instructional leadership on organizational commitment through job satisfaction was 2%, with the remaining influence attributed to other variables. Similarly the results of study conducted by Tatlah et al., (2019) also found the same result which was the direct effect of instructional leadership on unstandardized coefficient of instructional leadership on teachers commitment β^ =.845, t= 7.898, p = 0.00 was found statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, contrasting results were noted in the study by Vivian, (2025) which indicated that instructional leadership was not significantly predict teacher job commitment.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals, job satisfactions and organizational commitment of teachers in secondary schools of east Hararghe zone. The finding disclosed that instructional leadership can positively influence teachers’ commitment to be willing and remain in the organization and feel part of it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe instructional leadership focuses more on the human side of individuals and their professional development, motivation, satisfaction and commitment. Thus, school principal instructional leadership behaviors enacted as a member of the institution, and no longer seek merely self-interest, but which is beneficial to the school as a whole. When the school principals are of great follower characteristics, they listen to individual teachers comments, attend to the needs of teachers, give them mental stimulation, and provide a situation where teachers develop a sense of attachment to their stand make them strive for the success of the school by developing participative school mission, managing instructional program and developing a positive school learning climate.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe role of the school principals as an instructional leader greatly contributes to the improvement of school performance and contributes to the level of job satisfaction and commitment of teachers. Teachers and students together need appreciation, incentives, and even recognition for the efforts they have put in. This element has a huge impact on the formation of motivation, determination, \u0026amp; enthusiasm to keep trying among teachers and students. The efforts of the school principals in rewarding are very practical \u0026amp; should be done as a means to increase self-confidence and also appreciation. All parties must work together to make the school a knowledge-based institution that will produce successful human beings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the results of the analysis in the study, it can be concluded that there is a direct correlation between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment. Also a direct correlation between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment dimensions of secondary school teachers in east Hararghe zone.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition, majority of teachers in east Hararghe zone secondary schools experienced a moderate level commitment. Similarly, teachers’ organizational commitment towards their institutions and some teachers had a moderate emotional attachment, belongingness, and moderate obligation to stay in the schools. Nevertheless, their continuance commitment is relatively low which indicates leaving the organization has a high cost for the teachers or their perceived lack of alternatives. On the other hand, when the school principals exhibit instructional leadership behavior more the teachers will be satisfied more, and they will be better committed to their schools'. These findings indicate that systemic issues in the teaching working environment have not been adequately addressed by educational stakeholders, necessitating urgent and targeted interventions that simultaneously improve both job satisfaction \u0026amp; commitment to mitigate the risk of teacher attrition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.3. Recommendations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the preceding sections, the summary of the major findings and conclusions drawn out were presented successively. Therefore, based on the major findings of the study and conclusions, the following recommendations were put forward to school principals, Woreda education offices and zone education office heads and other concerned body of east Hararghe zone school principals to assess their leadership skill and improve the level of their teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment by formulating different policy directions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ev The highly practiced instructional leadership dimensions in east Hararghe zone was defining school mission though managing instructional program and developing positive school climate positively correlated with organizational commitment. Thus, school principals should acquire a sense of understanding and need to make self-assessment on their leadership effectiveness to implement all the three dimensions of instructional leadership style in correspondence with teachers’ commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ev The East Hararghe zone and woreda education offices would also provide periodic school leadership development workshops, training and seminars to improve school principal’s leadership behavior and appreciating individual and team contributions. Research in this area would also help East Hararghe zone and woreda education administrators to determine the degree to which principals exhibit certain behaviors \u0026amp; whether these behaviors lead to increased teachers commitment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ev Using appropriate leadership style can have direct and indirect effect on organizational commitments and job satisfaction of teachers. This shows whenever secondary school principals education invest more on the development of school principals, directly or indirectly they can improve the job satisfaction and organizational commitment of their teachers. Therefore, school principals should be observant in noticing how their behaviors and characteristics are being modeled to ensure that their leadership is cascading effectively. For example, school principals may demonstrate instructional leadership to the teachers and department heads.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ev Furthermore, the job satisfaction is positively related to organizational commitment, which is a signal to the secondary school principals and other concerned bodies that they need to ensure teachers should be highly satisfied with their job in order to improve the occurrence of highly committed teachers which in turn affect the overall effectiveness of their school. Therefore, school principals should foster a positive school climate: promote collaboration, recognition, and trust among staff to build a supportive and motivating work environment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ev Thus, it is possible to suggest that an effort made to increase teachers’ job satisfaction in each facet is an effort made to increase the teacher’s emotional \u0026amp; moral attachment to their school. Therefore, school principals would also enhance instructional support: provide regular \u0026amp; constructive feedback, facilitate professional development \u0026amp; ensure the availability of teaching resources to support instructional quality.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRecommendations for future Research\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAny research has its own limitations and this research is not an exception. As a result, it has come up with some suggestions for future research. These include but may not be limited to the following.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· This study focused on instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment of government secondary school in east Hararghe zone. A replication of this study could be conducted in primary schools in future research. The teachers and principals in this study practiced in government school settings. Future research could focus on private schools and compare instructional leadership, teachers’ commitment in private schools. Principal perceptions of self-reported instructional leadership could be compared to teacher perceptions of instructional leadership, teachers’ commitment in future studies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· This quantitative research was limited to the study of correlation between leadership styles, teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools. The study did not look for causation or the meanings behind the results. Further research into human behavior and reasons that govern the association between leadership styles, job satisfaction and organizational commitment might reveal additional information that schools could use in developing leaders and meeting specific organizational goals. Future research could provide further insight under a mixed methods approach using both quantitative and qualitative procedures to collect and analyze data responses to explore the causal relationships between instructional leadership and teacher outcomes, particularly in under-researched rural and pastoral settings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· In my study, we used the PIMRS and TCM to collect data. Future studies can use different instruments to collect data. Other future researchers may use additional instruments include the organizational commitment survey, and the job descriptive index (Smith, Kendall, \u0026amp; Hulin, 1969). Researchers who use these additional instruments may have findings that differ or are like the findings of my study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· Additionally, this study focused on government secondary school in east Hararghe zone, the scope of this study did not include other zones of Oromia regional state and other regions. A similar or replicative study could be conducted in any one of these organizations to determine if findings are consistent or if significant differences exist, particularly in under-researched rural and pastoral settings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· Another area to consider is gender regarding low female participation. A similar study may be conducted within the other zones or within other region that have more gender diversity. Within this study, only 30 (9.8%) female teachers and 2 (3.2%) school principals responded of total responses. The low number of teachers in general and school principals in particular is underrepresented by the female population as a whole, but even more so in primary schools. These results are indicative of the geographical location where this study was conducted, as females are significantly underrepresented in the leadership position but may not be to the same extent in other zones and regions..\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e· Future studies should include more zones, regions and school levels. They should use long-term methods to find causes. They should add more variables. Using both numbers and detailed interviews would give a better understanding of how leadership, teacher satisfaction, and teacher commitment connect.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimitations of the Research Method and Design\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research method and design had some restrictions concerning the analysis of the relationship between leadership style, job satisfaction and commitment. The study used quantitative method and did not cover all research methods. While the quantitative approach is crucial for understanding and identifying trends, relying solely on numbers can restrict the depth and the participants' and teachers' ability to express their views during data collection for this dissertation. Therefore, future research necessitates the use of mixed methods by integrating both quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide a more in-depth understanding of and causes of the problem in the study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eQuantitative techniques or research designs like correlational and descriptive survey research designs have benefits as far as analyzing the issues in this study, but they too have shortcomings. A limitation of this descriptive survey study approach is its absence of causality. Descriptive surveys can identify connections and trends but cannot show cause and effect to establish causality. They only provide data without elucidating the rationale behind the observed trends. It is also affected by self-report biases. Due to social desirability, problems of recall or distortion relating to comprehension of the questions, respondents are likely to provide information that contains errors and bias, thus affecting the reliability of the data. Quantitative data is the main data type collected in surveys, leaving out some important aspects and the richness of the respondents' experience and opinions. The study used descriptive-correlational design. This design is good for early-stage and single-time analysis. But they cannot show cause and effect, so, it limited depth. In correlational research designs, for example, the descriptive survey referred to earlier on, correlation does not equate to causation. Where there is a correlation between two variables, it is not implied that there is causation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e1. \u003cstrong\u003eFunding Statement:\u003c/strong\u003e This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2. \u003cstrong\u003eConflict of Interest:\u003c/strong\u003e The author(s) declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Author Contributions\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot; M.A.: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, and drafting of the original manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot; B.Z.: Investigation, project administration, supervision of the research, data validation, and manuscript revision and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot; M.K.: Formal analysis, provision of resources, software support, and manuscript revision and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot; T.H.: Formal analysis, funding acquisition, provision of resources, coding and theme extraction using SPSS, and manuscript revision and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4. \u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements:\u003c/strong\u003e The author(s) acknowledges Haramaya University, College of Education and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Educational Planning and Management, for institutional support throughout the research and writing process.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5. \u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval:\u003c/strong\u003e The present study was approved by Institute of Education and Behavioral Science Research Committee, Haramaya University dated 21.05.2025. The study was performed in accordance with the Haramaya University guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6. \u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Participate:\u003c/strong\u003e All participating teachers were informed about the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of their participation, and their right to withdraw at any time. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7. \u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eConsent for publication \u003cstrong\u003enot applicable\u003c/strong\u003e; since the study does not include any identifiable images or personal data.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8. \u003cstrong\u003eData availability statement\u003c/strong\u003e: \u0026ldquo;The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to confidentiality agreements with participating schools, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003cp\u003eAbdullah, J., Harbi, A., Alarifi, S., \u0026amp; Mosbah, A. (2018). Transformation leadership and creativity Effects of employees pyschological empowerment and intrinsic motivation \u003cem\u003ePersonnel Review\u003c/em\u003e 48(5), 1082-1099.https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2017-0354\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbebe, T., \u0026amp; Markos, S. (2016). The Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in Public Higher Education Institution: The Case of Arba Minch University, Ethiopia,. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Research in Business Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(8), 2347\u0026ndash;4572.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbu, A. R. (2023). Vuca World \u003cem\u003e: \u003c/em\u003eThe Commitment of teacher organization and student outcome in Malaysian primary school. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Academic Research in Business \u0026amp; Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1378\u0026ndash;1389. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i5/16551\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdom, D., Hussein, E. K., \u0026amp; Agyem, J. A. (2018). Mandatory Ingredients of a Quality Research. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Scientific Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(1), 438\u0026ndash;441. https://wwjournals.com/index.php/ijsr/article/view/6595/6536\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAil, M., Taib, R. bin, Jaafar, H. bt, Salleh, R. bt M., \u0026amp; Omar, N. bin. (2015). Principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership and teachers\u0026rsquo; commitment in Three Mara Junior Science Colleges (Mjsc) in Pahang, Malaysia. \u003cem\u003eProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e191\u003c/em\u003e(2010), 1848\u0026ndash;1853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.512\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAkpan, B., Ebenezer, E., \u0026amp; Collins Piate, R. (2023). Assessment of Different Methods of Sampling Techniques: The Strengths and Weakness. \u003cem\u003eShared Seasoned International Journal of Topical Issues\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1), 64\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAl-Mahdy, H., Emam, M., \u0026amp; Hallinger, P. (2018). Assessing the contribution of principal instructional leadership and collective teacher efficacy to teacher commitment in Oman. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Teacher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e69\u003c/em\u003e, 191\u0026ndash;201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.007\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlemu, A. (2024). Challenges and Prospects: Understanding Teachers\u0026rsquo; Attitudes towards the Teaching Profession in Ethiopia \u003cem\u003eSocial Sciences \u0026amp; Humanities Open\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(June), 100933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100933\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAllen, N. J., \u0026amp; Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective , continuance and normative commitment to the organization. 1\u0026ndash;18.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmri, U. (2024). The impact of instructional leadership organizational culture and organizational commitment to teacher performance at Junior High school.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ePakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e 22(2), 17231\u0026ndash;17240. DOI: 10.57239/PJLSS-2024-22.2.001253\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnderson, V. (2023). The relationship between career satisfaction and organizational commitment: evidence from the Kuwaiti Banking Sector, \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Training and Development \u0026ndash; \u003c/em\u003e1\u0026ndash;49. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2023-0073\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eArdo, A., Gurin, M., \u0026amp; Buhari, M. (2024). Effect of affective commitment on the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance of public school teachers in Yobe State, Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eInvestment Management and Financial Innovations\u003c/em\u003e, 13(3-1), 267-273. doi:10.21511/imfi.13 (3-1). 1\u0026ndash;16\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAriansyah, N., Aslamiah, \u0026amp; Sulaiman. (2022). The Relationship Between Instructional Leadership and teacher commitment to Organizational Climate and Teacher Job Satisfaction at TK Strawberry Banjarmasin Utara. \u003cem\u003eJournal of K6 Education and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(3), 319\u0026ndash;330. https://doi.org/10.11594/jk6em.04.03.06\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAskade, B., Yeshitila, M., \u0026amp; Melaku, W. (2025). Assessment of teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and professional commitment at Sekota college of teachers\u0026rsquo; education. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Statistical Distributions and Applications,\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(2), 45\u0026ndash;55 http://www.sciencepg.com/journal/ijsda\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAyele, G. (2022). Leadership Styles of Principals and Teachers\u0026rsquo; Organizational Commitment in Bale Zone Secondary Schools. \u003cem\u003eThe Educational Review, USA\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(6), 241\u0026ndash;250. https://doi.org/10.26855/er.2022.06.008\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBada, H. A., Ariffin, T. F. T., \u0026amp; Nordin, H. (2020). Teachers\u0026rsquo; perception of principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership practices in Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eUniversal Journal of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(10), 4459\u0026ndash;4469. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081013\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBaek, H., Han, K., \u0026amp; Ryu, E. (2019). Authentic leadership, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: The moderating effect of nurse tenure. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Nursing Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1655\u0026ndash;1663. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12853\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBass, B. M., \u0026amp; Riggio, R. E. (2005). Transformational leadership: Second edition. Transformational Leadership: Second Edition, 1\u0026ndash;282. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617095\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBellibaş, M. Ş. (2016). Principals \u0026rsquo; and Teachers \u0026rsquo; Perceptions of Efforts by Principals to Improve Teaching and Learning in Turkish Middle Schools *.\u003cem\u003e Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice\u003c/em\u003e 15(6), 1471\u0026ndash;1485. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.1.0009\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBhalerao, S., \u0026amp; Kadam, P. (2010). Sample size calculation. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Ayurveda Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(1), 55. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7788.59946\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBinti Si-Rajab, S., Madya, P., \u0026amp; Bin Musa, D. K. (2019). The Level of Instructional Leadership Practices Among Principals of National Religious Secondary School in Malaysia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Scientific Research and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(03), 927\u0026ndash;939. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v7i3.el03\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBratnicka, K. (2015). Relationship Between Leadership Styles and Organizational Creativity. \u003cem\u003eManagement and Business Administration. Central Europe\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(1), 69\u0026ndash;78. https://doi.org/10.7206/mba.ce.2084-3356.134\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBush, T. (2014). Instructional Leadership in Centralized Contexts: Rhetoric or Reality? \u003cem\u003eEducational Management Administration and Leadership\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213507207\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCansoy, R. (2018). The Relationship between School Principals\u0026rsquo; Leadership Behaviours and Teachers\u0026rsquo; Job Satisfaction: A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eInternational Education Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n1p37\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCansoy, R., Parlar, H., \u0026amp; Polatcan, M. (2022a). Collective teacher efficacy as a mediator in the relationship between instructional leadership and teacher commitment. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Leadership in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(6), 900\u0026ndash;918. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1708470\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCansoy, R., Parlar, H., \u0026amp; Polatcan, M. (2022b). Collective teacher efficacy as a mediator in the relationship between instructional leadership and teacher commitment. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Leadership in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(6), 900\u0026ndash;918. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1708470\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChayomchai, A. (2024). Relationships between Organizational Culture, Organizational Commitment, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Current Science Research and Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e07\u003c/em\u003e(05), 2639\u0026ndash;2645. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr/v7-i5-25\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCochran, W. G. (1977). \u003cem\u003eCochran_1977_\u003c/em\u003eSampling Techniques.\u003cem\u003epdf\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 1\u0026ndash;428).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCohen, A., \u0026amp; Liu, Y. (2011). Relationships between in-role performance and individual values, commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior among Israeli teachers. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e(4), 271\u0026ndash;287. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.539613\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCohen, Y., Dokkum, P. van, Danieli, S., Romanowsky, A. J., Abraham, R., Merritt, A., Zhang, J., Mowla, L., Kruijssen, J. M. D., Conroy, C., \u0026amp; Wasserman, A. (2018). The Dragonfly Nearby Galaxies Survey. V. HST/ACS Observations of 23 Low Surface Brightness Objects in the Fields of NGC 1052, NGC 1084, M96, and NGC 4258. \u003cem\u003eThe Astrophysical Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e868\u003c/em\u003e(2), 96. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aae7c8\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCollins, S. P., Storrow, A., Liu, D., Jenkins, C. A., Miller, K. F., Kampe, C., \u0026amp; Butler, J. (2021). Examining Whether a Self-Care Program Reduces Healthcare Use and Improves Health among Patients with Acute Heart Failure\u0026mdash;The Guided HF Study \u003cem\u003ePatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute \u003c/em\u003e67\u0026ndash;186. https://doi.org/10.25302/04.2021.AD.140921656\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCreswell, J., W. (2009). Mapping the Field of Mixed Methods Research. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Mixed Methods Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(2), 95\u0026ndash;108. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1558689808330883\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCreswell, J. W. (2014). Proceedings of the annual conference of the international speech communication association, INTERSPEECH. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, INTERSPEECH\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDea Lerra, M. (2021). The Link and Effect of Leadership Style on Teacher Organizational Commitment in South Ethiopia: A Case of Wolaita Zone. \u003cem\u003eTurkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(12), 3449\u0026ndash;3456.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDemissie, M. M. (2023). Principals\u0026rsquo; Leadership Styles and Secondary School Teachers \u0026rsquo; Organiza- tional Commitment in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eDilla Journal of Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;12. https://doi.org/10.20372/dje.v02i01.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDonald, M. F. (2016).\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo; \u003c/em\u003eThe relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational commitment among academics : the mediating effect of job satisfaction \u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eI\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003envestment Management and Financial Innovations\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.13(3-1).2016.13\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuggal, C., Sriram, S., \u0026amp; Jain, K. (2018). Marriage Counsellors\u0026rsquo; Reflections on the Counselling Process in Family Courts in India. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e63\u003c/em\u003e(4), 365\u0026ndash;375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0460-z\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDunham, R. B., Grube, J. A., \u0026amp; Castaneda, M. B. (1994). Organizational Commitment : The Utility of an Integrative Definition. Journal of Applied Psychology \u003cem\u003e79\u003c/em\u003e(3), 370\u0026ndash;380 DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEndalu, T. M. (2024). Principals\u0026rsquo; Leadership Styles and Teachers\u0026rsquo; Organizational Commitment: The Mediating Role of Teachers\u0026rsquo; Job Satisfaction in Addis Ababa Government Secondary Schools. 1\u0026ndash;185.Doctor of Philosophy, Addis Ababa University\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEsponda-P\u0026eacute;rez, J. \u0026amp; M. F. J. \u0026amp; C. K. (2024). Extent of Teachers Organizational Commitment Among University School Teachers. \u003cem\u003eKurdish Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 2368\u0026ndash;2380. https://doi.org/10.58262/ks.v12i1.165\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFeyisa, L. B., \u0026amp; Edosa, K. C. (2023). Instructional Leadership Practices and Challenges: The Case of Primary School Principals in Liban Jawi Woreda of West Shoa Zone. \u003cem\u003eEducation Research International\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2023\u003c/em\u003e. (2):1-11 https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/3439653\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGardner, A. (2018). The relationship between organizational commitment and transformational and transactional leadership styles in government contract employees. \u003cem\u003ePhD Thesis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eDecember\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;148.Doctor of Philosophy, Walden University\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGechere, T., Oumer, J., \u0026amp; Ouke, T. (2025). Influence of principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership and teachers\u0026rsquo; efficacy on students\u0026rsquo; performance in secondary schools in the Wolaita Zone, South Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eDiscover Sustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01797-3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGeda, T. B. (2015). Principals\u0026rsquo; leadership behavior and teachers commitment in Adama Town Public Secondary Schools of Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eMediterranean Journal of Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(4S1), 204\u0026ndash;209. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4s1p204\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGetahun, T., Tefera, B. F., \u0026amp; Burichew, A. H. (2016). Teacher\u0026rsquo;s Job Satisfaction And Its Relationship With Organizational Commitment In Ethiopian Primary Schools: Focus On Primary Schools Of Bonga Town. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Scientific Journal, ESJ\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(13), 380. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n13p380\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGurmu, T. G. (2018). Development of the Ethiopian school leadership: foundation, self-dependence, and historical erratic evolution. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Administration and History\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e(4), 343\u0026ndash;363. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2018.1512956\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHabibi, A. (2025). Commitment and school climate on teachers \u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and performance: Asian context. November. \u003cem\u003eAsian Education and Development Studies\u003c/em\u003e 14 (5), pp. 1002-1021https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-11-2024-0262\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHallinger, P., \u0026amp; Hosseingholizadeh, R. (2018). Do beliefs make a difference ? Exploring how principal self-efficacy and instructional leadership impact teacher efficacy and commitment in Iran.\u003cem\u003e Educational Management Administration \u0026amp; Leadership\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e(5), 800\u0026ndash;819. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217700283\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHallinger, P., \u0026amp; Lee, M. (2013). International Journal of Educational Development Exploring principal capacity to lead reform of teaching and learning quality in Thailand \u0026sect;. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 305\u0026ndash;315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2012.03.002\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHallinger, P., \u0026amp; Lee, M. (2014). Mapping instructional leadership in Thailand: Has education reform impacted principal practice? \u003cem\u003eEducational Management Administration and Leadership\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(1), 6\u0026ndash;29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502196\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHallinger, P., \u0026amp; Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the Instructional Management Behavior of Principals. \u003cem\u003eThe Elementary School Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e86\u003c/em\u003e(2), 217\u0026ndash;247. https://doi.org/10.1086/461445\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHallinger, P., Wang, W. C., Chen, C. W., \u0026amp; Li, D. (2015). Assessing instructional leadership with the principal instructional management rating scale. In Assessing Instructional Leadership with the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (Issue May 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15533-3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHarahap, M. E., \u0026amp; Suriansyah, A. (2019). Relationship of instructional leadership, organizational climate and teacher\u0026rsquo;s commitment to job satisfaction. \u003cem\u003eJournal of K6, Education, and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(4), 260\u0026ndash;270. https://doi.org/10.11594/jk6em.02.04.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHarris, A., Jones, M., Adams, D., \u0026amp; Cheah, K. (2019). Instructional leadership in Malaysia: a review of the contemporary literature*. \u003cem\u003eSchool Leadership and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e(1), 76\u0026ndash;95. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2018.1453794\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., \u0026amp; Dulebohn, J. H. (2018). Do Ethical , Authentic , and Servant Leadership Explain Variance Above and Beyond Transformational Leadership ? A Meta-Analysis.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eJournal of Management\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e (2), 501\u0026ndash;529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316665461\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHosseingholizadeh, R., Amrahi, A., \u0026amp; El-Farr, H. (2023). Instructional leadership, and teacher\u0026rsquo;s collective efficacy, commitment, and professional learning in primary schools: a mediation model. \u003cem\u003eProfessional Development in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(3), 518\u0026ndash;535. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1850510\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eImran, Q., Ghani, U., \u0026amp; Kazimi, A. B. (2025). The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies Examining The Impact of Instructional Leadership on Teachers\u0026rsquo; Organizational Commitment: Mediating Role of Teacher Trust in Principal and Teacher Motivation.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eThe Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(2), 1037\u0026ndash;1056.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIngersoll, R. M. (2020). Misdiagnosing the Teacher Quality Problem. The State of Education Policy Research, February, 291\u0026ndash;306. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003064466-24\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIram Tahir, \u0026amp; Noor Fatima. (2023). Effect of principal\u0026rsquo;s instructional leadership practices on teachers\u0026rsquo; professional development: A cross sectional study of secondary school level from selected areas of Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science and Research Archive\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(2), 590\u0026ndash;606. https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2023.10.2.0986\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIrmayani, I., Nasution, S. L., \u0026amp; Halim, A. (2022). Work Involvement, Work Attitude, Discipline and Commitment to Employee Productivity Office Regional Revenue Agency Labuhanbatu Regency. \u003cem\u003eBudapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal \u003c/em\u003e(BIRCI) 5(1), 2679-2690, https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v5i1.3877\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJeannette, N., Ntawiha, P., \u0026amp; Leonard Buhigiro, J. (2023). Influence of Primary School Head Teachers\u0026rsquo; Instructional Leadership on Teachers\u0026rsquo; Professional Practices in Musanze District, Rwanda. \u003cem\u003eEast African Journal of Education and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(4), 143\u0026ndash;150. https://doi.org/10.46606/eajess2023v04i04.0312\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJilcha, K. (2019). Research Design and Methodolog https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKassaw, E. S., \u0026amp; Golga, D. N. (2019). Academic staffs\u0026rsquo; level of organizational commitment in higher educational setting: The case of Haramaya university. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 87\u0026ndash;100. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v8n2p87\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKaya, K., Erdoğan, O., Yeşil, Y., \u0026amp; Sezgin, F. (2024). The Roles of collective teacher efficacy and commitment in the relationship between Turkish Language teachers\u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and school principal distributed leadership. \u003cem\u003eSAGE\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e Open\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(3), 1\u0026ndash;15.. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241271136\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKemal Abdurahim Ahmed. (2016). Instructional Leadership Practices in Maldives. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(7), 191\u0026ndash;211.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKeman, N. J., Alias, B. S., \u0026amp; Norhaini, A. (2025). The influence of the headmaster \u0026rsquo; s transformational leadership on teacher\u0026rsquo;s commitment to the instillation of al-Hikmah \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(3), 2148\u0026ndash;2164. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v15-i3/25169\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKhan, A. A., Asimiran, S. Bin, Kadir, S. A., Alias, S. N., Atta, B., Bularafa, B. A., \u0026amp; Rehman, M. U. (2020). Instructional leadership and students academic performance: Mediating effects of teacher\u0026rsquo;s organizational commitment. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(10), 233\u0026ndash;247. https://doi.org/10.26803/IJLTER.19.10.13\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKhan, F., \u0026amp; Gupta, V. (2025). Examining the relationships between instructional leadership , teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: a study of primary schools in India Journal of Educational Administration \u003cem\u003e62\u003c/em\u003e(2), 223\u0026ndash;238. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2022-0145\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKhan, S., Mok, S., Sam, R., Mam, S., Em, S., \u0026amp; Pen, D. (2024). Teachers\u0026rsquo; Perceptions on Directors\u0026rsquo; Instructional Leadership in Secondary Resource Schools: Regional Variations and Impacts on Teachers Commitment in Cambodia. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Contemporary Education and E-Learning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(6), 259\u0026ndash;274. https://doi.org/10.59324/ejceel.2024.2(6).17\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKim, S., \u0026amp; Lee, J. (2025). The mediating effect of teacher commitment in the relationship between burnout and role performance of early childhood teachers \u003cem\u003eFront. Education \u003c/em\u003e1\u0026ndash;11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1474838\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKiral, E., \u0026amp; Su\u0026ccedil;i̇\u0026ccedil;eği̇, -Aynur. (2017). The Relationship between teachers\u0026rsquo; perception of school principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership and organisational commitment level. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Psycho-Educational Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1), 95\u0026ndash;109.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKubai, P. K. (2023). Full Range Leadership Styles On Organizational Performance Of Private Universities In Kenya Polycarp Koome Kubai ( Human Resource Management ) Jomo Kenyatta University, Doctor of Philosophy, Jomo Kenyatta University .\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKumar, S. (2024). Analyzing the Factors Influencing Job Satisfaction among Teachers: A Study of Work Environment, Professional Development, and Work-Life Balance. November.\u003cem\u003e Bhartiyam International Journal of Education \u0026amp; Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1-12.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLacaza, J. L., \u0026amp; Dioso, E. (2025). School Principals\u0026rsquo; Instructional Leadership Behavior and Job Satisfaction of Teachers: A Correlation. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Interdisciplinary Viewpoints\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(4), 552\u0026ndash;577. https://doi.org/10.64612/ijiv.v1i4.32\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLatif, Z., \u0026amp; Habib, Z. (2021). Relationship between instructional leadership practices and organizational commitment of teachers at secondary school level in Lahore Districts. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Research and Social Sciences Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(4), 12-19.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSerang, S., Ramlawati, R., Suriyanti, S., Junaidi, J., \u0026amp; Nurimansjah, R. A. (2024). The role of ethical leadership on employees\u0026rsquo; behaviors and commitment to the organization SA\u003cem\u003e Journal of Human Resource Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 2373\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLeshem, S., \u0026amp; Trafford, V. (2007). Overlooking the conceptual framework. \u003cem\u003eInnovations in Education and Teaching International\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(1), 93\u0026ndash;105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290601081407\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLima, W., \u0026amp; Allida, D. 2021. The relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment among employees of a selected tertiary educational institution in Northwest Haiti \u003cem\u003eEast African Journal of Education and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, 2(1), 33\u0026ndash;44. https://doi.org/10.46606/eajess2021v02i01.0063\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMaiocco, K. A. (2017). A Quantitative Examination of the Relationship Between Leadership and Organizational Commitment in Employees of Faith-Based Organizations. Doctor of Philosophy, Liberty University\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMarie, G., Agad, J. B., \u0026amp; Pinca, J. T. (2025). The Relationship between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction among Early Childhood Teachers. \u003cem\u003eAsian Journal of Education and Social Studies\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e,\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(7), 255\u0026ndash;262.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMetaferia, T., Baraki, Z., \u0026amp; Mebratu, B. (2023). Link between transformational leadership and teachers organizational commitment in Addis Ababa government secondary schools Link between transformational leadership and teachers organizational commitment in Addis Ababa government secondary schools. \u003cem\u003eCogent Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2187563\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeyer, J. P., \u0026amp; Allen, N. J. (2004). TCM Employee Commitment Survey Academic Users Guide 2004. University of Western Ontario, 16. http://employeecommitment.com/TCM-Employee-Commitment-Survey-Academic-Package-2004.pdf%0Ahttp://audacityblog.info/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Meyer-Allen-Empl-Commitment-Survey.pdf\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., \u0026amp; Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and Test of a Three-Component Conceptualization. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e78\u003c/em\u003e(4), 538\u0026ndash;551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., \u0026amp; Topolnytsky, L. (2002a). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Vocational Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e61\u003c/em\u003e(1), 20\u0026ndash;52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., \u0026amp; Topolnytsky, L. (2002b). Affective , Continuance , and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-analysis of Antecedents , Correlates , and Consequences\u003cem\u003e Journal of vocational behavior\u003c/em\u003e 61(1), 20\u0026ndash;52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeyer, J. P., Stanley, L. J., \u0026amp; Parfyonova, N. M. (2012). Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Vocational Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e80\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.07.002\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMohamad Zaki, M. bin. (2022). Instructional Leadership and The Commitment of School Organizations. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3), 454\u0026ndash;464. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v11-i3/14771\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNorawati, S., Mulyadi, M. A., Syahsudarmi, S., Yantama, A. A., \u0026amp; Fuaddi, H. (2025). Analisis Dampak Sertifikasi Guru Dan Budaya Sekolah Terhadap Kinerja Guru Dengan Kepuasan Kerja Sebagai Variabel Intervening \u003cem\u003eJURNAL MANAJEMEN DAN BISNIS\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(2), 541-560.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMowday_R_T_Steers_R_M_and_Porter_L_W_1979.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eThe measurement of organizational commitment\u003cem\u003e Journal of vocational behavior\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e (2), 224-247\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMunna, A. S. (2023). Instructional Leadership and Role of Module Leaders. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Reform\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(1), 38\u0026ndash;54. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879211042321\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNanjundeswaraswamy, T. S. (2023). The mediating role of job satisfaction in the relationship between leadership styles and employee commitment. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Economic and Administrative Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e(2), 286\u0026ndash;304. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEAS-02-2021-0029\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNazim, M., Agung, A. A. G., Yudana, I. M., \u0026amp; Dantes, K. R. (2023). influence of instructional leadership and organizational commitment to elementary schools teacher performance in Central Lombok. \u003cem\u003eInternational Research Journal of Management, IT and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(5), 305\u0026ndash;318. https://doi.org/10.21744/irjmis.v10n5.2364\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNellitawati, Ganefri, Rusdinal, Hardianto, Setiawan, M. N. A., Ginanjar, S., \u0026amp; Arwildayanto. (2024). The influence of instructional leadership and work commitment on teacher performance. \u003cem\u003eCakrawala Pendidikan\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(3), 546\u0026ndash;561. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v43i3.66677\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNeziri, I. (2021). Teacher Commitment: the Relationship Between the Continuance, Affective and Normative Work Commitment and the Physical, Social and Psychological Work Conditions. \u003cem\u003eNWSA Academic Journals\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 28\u0026ndash;43. https://doi.org/10.12739/nwsa.2021.16.2.1c0705\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNoor, T., \u0026amp; Nawab, A. (2022). Are school leaders working as instructional leaders? Exploration of school leadership practices in rural Pakistan. \u003cem\u003eCogent Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2109315\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNyenyembe, F. W., Maslowski, R., Nimrod, B. S., \u0026amp; Peter, L. (2016). Leadership Styles and Teachers\u0026rsquo; Job Satisfaction in Tanzanian Public Secondary Schools. \u003cem\u003eUniversal Journal of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(5), 980\u0026ndash;988. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040507\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOkwisa, M .2023. Leadership practices and academic performance of primary schools, Doctor of Philisophy, Jomo Kenyatta University 167. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOyewobi, L. O. (2022). Leadership styles and employees commitment: the mediating role of job satisfaction. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Facilities Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(5), 737\u0026ndash;757. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-06-2022-0069\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePark, S., \u0026amp; Choi, S. (2025). Boosting novice teachers\u0026rsquo; retention intention: international evidence on the role of mentoring via job satisfaction and organizational commitment. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Administration\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e63\u003c/em\u003e(6), 489-504 https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-04-2024-0108\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePatel, M., \u0026amp; Patel, N. (2019). Exploring research methodology \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Research and Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(3), 48-55.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePierro, A., Raven, B. H., Amato, C., \u0026amp; B\u0026eacute;langer, J. J. (2013). Bases of social power, leadership styles, and organizational commitment. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1122\u0026ndash;1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.733398\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePing, G. C., \u0026amp; Mohd Hamzah, M. I. (2021). the Level of Principal\u0026rsquo;S Instructional Leadership Practices and Its Relationship With School-Based Management in Secondary School in Tumpat District, Kelantan, Malaysia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Best Practices\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(1), 106. https://doi.org/10.31258/ijebp.v5n1.p106-116\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePurnomo, B. R., Eliyana, A., \u0026amp; Pramesti, E. D. (2020). The effect of leadership style, organizational culture and job satisfaction on employee performance with organizational commitment as the intervening variable. \u003cem\u003eSystematic Reviews in Pharmacy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(10), 446\u0026ndash;458. https://doi.org/10.31838/srp.2020.10.68\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePvma, A. (2024). OJ-TP The Structural Relationship Between Principal \u0026rsquo; s Instructional Leadership , Teacher Commitment and Teacher Self-Efficacy in Program Vokasional Menengah. . \u003cem\u003eOnline Journal for TVET Practitioners\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(2), 1-15. 9(2), 1\u0026ndash;15.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eQadarsih, L., Aslamiah, A., \u0026amp; Sulaiman, S. (2023). Relationship between Principal Instructional Leadership, Job Satisfaction, Work Commitment and Performance of SDN Teacher in South Banjarmasin District, Banjarmasin City. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Social Science and Human Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e06\u003c/em\u003e(05), 2903\u0026ndash;2911. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i5-50\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eQuiroz, G. O. (2021). The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15): Validation in Mexico and Disorder in the State of Knowledge \u003cem\u003eThe International Journal of Aging and Human Development\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(4), 196\u0026ndash;203.DOI: 10.1177/0091415020957387 \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSaleem, Z. (2017). A Study of the relationship between school principals\u0026rsquo; leadership styles and teachers\u0026rsquo; organzational commitmnet: Moderating role of emotional intelligence and support Doctoral of Philosophy, National University of Modern Languages Islamabad\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSarikaya, Nuray \u0026amp; Erdogan, C. (2016). Relationship between the Instructional Leadership Behaviors of High School Principals and Teachers\u0026rsquo; Organizational Commitment. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Education and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(3), 72\u0026ndash;82.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShaari, R., Kamarudin, D., Ju, S., \u0026amp; Zakaria, H. (2022). Effects of Leadership Types on Job Satisfaction Among Malaysian Higher Education Institutions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Instruction 10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 54\u0026ndash;70. https://doi.org/10.47215/aji.1020324\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShaked, H. (2025). How principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership impacts schools\u0026rsquo; middle leadership. Educational Management Administration \u0026amp; Leadership, 53(5), 977-990 https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432241238888\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShiferaw, G., \u0026amp; Ph, W. (2025). The mediating effect of organizational commitment on the relationship between teachers \u0026rsquo; job satisfaction and turnover intention. 25(3), 112\u0026ndash;128.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimin Ghavifekr, Omaymah Radwan, \u0026amp; M. Velarde, J. (2019). Teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions of principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership roles and practices. \u003cem\u003eJurnal Pendidikan Malaysia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(2), 72\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSkelton,T .2019. The relationship between organizational climate and organizational commitment of teachers. Doctor of Education, Louisiana Tech University\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSmith, A. M. (2025). Leading factors positively impacting teacher job satisfaction (Thesis, Concordia University, St. Paul). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.csp.edu/teachereducation_masters/135\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSucitra, D. A., Hariri, H., \u0026amp; Riswandi, R. (2024). Effect of principal instructional leadership on teacher commitment. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Education and Learning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(2), 279\u0026ndash;285. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v18i2.20980\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSucitra, D. A., Hariri, H., Riswandi, R., \u0026amp; Handoko, H. (2024). The Impact of Instructional Leadership, Organizational Culture, and Job Satisfaction on Teacher Commitment in Primary Schools. \u003cem\u003eTadris: Jurnal Keguruan Dan Ilmu Tarbiyah\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(1), 181. https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v9i1.20077\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSugandi, B., Tadesse, E., \u0026amp; Ghassani, N. (2022). A correlation study between principals\u0026lsquo; instructional leadership practice and teacher s\u0026lsquo;commitment in Yogyakarta Province, \u003cem\u003eIndonesia\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Scientific \u0026amp; Technology Research \u003c/em\u003e10(06), 77-93 \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSukarmin, \u0026amp; Sin, I. (2022). the Influence of Principal Instructional Leadership Behaviour on the Organisational Commitment of Junior High School Teachers in Surakarta. \u003cem\u003eMalaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(2), 69\u0026ndash;95. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2022.19.2.3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSultan, F. M. M., Karuppannan, G., \u0026amp; Rumpod, J. (2022). Instructional Leadership Practices Among Headmasters and The Correlation with Primary Schools\u0026rsquo; Achievement in Sabah, Malaysia. \u003cem\u003eEnglish Language Teaching\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(2), 50. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v15n2p50\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSyabarrudin, A., Eliyana, A., \u0026amp; Naimah, J. (2020). -Efficacy Drive their Organizational Commitment ? \u003cem\u003eSystematic Reviews in Pharmacy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(4), 135\u0026ndash;141. https://doi.org/10.31838/srp.2020.4.21\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSyamil, A., \u0026amp; Rahim, A. (2025).\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eTeacher\u0026rsquo;s Organizational Commitment And Strategic Planning Practices IN TS25 schools in Kubang Pasu District \u003cem\u003eJournal of Advanced Social Educational Development Discovery \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(1), 14\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTadesse, E. F. (2019). Teachers\u0026rsquo; organizational commitment at secondary school in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Education and Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(4), 55-68.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTaimin, J., \u0026amp; Kim, N. G. (2025). A Conceptual Paper on the Relationship between Instructional Leadership and Teacher Organisational Commitment. \u003cem\u003eIX\u003c/em\u003e(2454), 186\u0026ndash;198. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTatlah, I. A., Naeem Akhtar, S., \u0026amp; Hashmi, M. A. (2019). Effect of Instructional Leadership on Teachers\u0026rsquo; Performance and Job Commitment: A Comparison of Public and Private Universities of Lahore. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Research, Dept. of Education, IUB\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(1), 133\u0026ndash;144.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTessema, L. (2025). Examining principals \u0026rsquo; instructional leadership practices at the middle schools in Banja Woreda , Ethiopia \u003cem\u003eInjibara Journal of Social Science and Business\u003c/em\u003e, 1(2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThien, L. M., \u0026amp; Adams, D. (2021). Distributed leadership and teachers\u0026rsquo; affective commitment to change in Malaysian primary schools: the contextual influence of gender and teaching experience. \u003cem\u003eEducational Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(2), 179\u0026ndash;199. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1680349\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThien, L. M., Darmawan, I. N., \u0026amp; Adams, D. (2023). (Re)Investigating the pathways between instructional leadership, collective teacher efficacy, and teacher commitment: a multilevel analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(4), 830\u0026ndash;845. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2022-0516\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTran, S. (2025). Teachers\u0026rsquo; perception of principal instructional leadership practices in five accredited kindergartens run by DMI sisters in Vietnam. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Research Studies in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(12), 229\u0026ndash;245. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2025.25221\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVivian, U. (2025). Influence of biology teachers\u0026rsquo;workload on their job satisfaction and stress level in secondary schools in Enugu education zone. \u003cem\u003eUnizik Journal Of Educational Research, Science And Vocational Studies \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(1), 20\u0026ndash;30.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWayne K. Hoy, \u0026amp; M. (2008). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6th. In \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Administration\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 46, Issue 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWelch, R., \u0026amp; Yang, R. (2011). A pearl on the silk road? Internationalizing a regional Chinese university. In The internationalization of East Asian higher education: Globalization\u0026rsquo;s impact (pp. 63-89). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8933-5\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYamane, T., Wyluda, B. J., \u0026amp; Shulman, R. G. (1967). Dihydrothymine from UV-irradiated DNA. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e58\u003c/em\u003e(2), 439\u0026ndash;442. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.58.2.439\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYasser, F. H., Hendawy Al-Mahdy, A., \u0026amp; Al-Kiyumi, R. (2015). Teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions of principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership in Omani schools. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(12), 1504\u0026ndash;1510. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-3-12-4\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZamani, M., Maidin, M., \u0026amp; Tumiran, M. A. (2024). A Review on Interconnection Concept of Teacher Commitment and Performance in Instructional Leadership. \u003cem\u003eAsian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2024.6.2.48\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZhan, Q., Wang, X., \u0026amp; Song, H. (2023). The relationship between principals\u0026rsquo; instructional leadership and teacher retention in the undeveloped regions of central and western China: The chain-mediating role of role stress and affective commitment. \u003cem\u003eBehavioral Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(9), 738 https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13090738\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Government Secondary Schools, Instructional leadership, Teachers’ Commitment ","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8378856/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8378856/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. Correlational design of quantitative method was used to achieve this objective. From the total of 57 secondary schools in East Hararghe zone 24 schools were selected using stratified and simple random sampling techniques. A total of 420 sample respondents were selected using simple random sampling technique from East Hararghe zone secondary schools which were selected using stratified random sampling technique. The data were collected through a standardized principal instructional management rating scale for instructional leadership and a three-component for teachers commitment scale adopted by permission. The data were analyzed using descriptive such as mean, standard deviation and inferential statistics such as Pearson correlation. The findings revealed that teachers’ job satisfaction in East Hararghe zone secondary schools is at a moderate level. Similarly, teachers reported moderate level of their commitment. Furthermore, there is positive and strong relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and commitment. It is suggested that further cross-sectional studies be carried out in more zones, secondary schools and primary schools, including private ones using mixed method research and more data analysis tests.","manuscriptTitle":"Relationship between instructional leadership styles of principals and teachers’ commitment in government secondary schools of east Hararghe zone, Oromia national regional state, Ethiopia.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-10 11:52:44","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8378856/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-07T15:33:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-14T18:50:19+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"331876312597897952285836928241987416802","date":"2026-04-07T13:08:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"36656724036822381046537979228934001654","date":"2026-03-22T15:38:23+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"179115776715309680763257223387686157162","date":"2026-03-22T05:41:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-26T09:05:58+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"304222460474678586296848759756815851945","date":"2026-02-14T10:33:50+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"55930100442645182421826790322112709685","date":"2026-02-09T19:21:00+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-07T10:39:08+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"278804174622692736820467449058573134538","date":"2026-02-07T08:36:22+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-02-04T14:30:28+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-01-07T10:12:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-01-02T05:22:36+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-12-30T15:29:58+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Education","date":"2025-12-30T15:21:39+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"cd9525cd-f413-4935-ac11-77d6569a3ac2","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 10th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-07T15:33:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-18T05:39:02+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-10 11:52:44","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8378856","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8378856","identity":"rs-8378856","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}