School leadership has been identified by a number of researchers as a key element in the effectiveness of school organizations (Marzano, Waters, & McNulty 2005; Kythreotis, & Pashiardis, 2006). As a result, the various stakeholders have widened their expectations for schools principals demanding higher academic results and performance standards (Weindling, & Dimmock, 2006). Although considerable progress has been made in leadership effects research, we still lack systematic empirical validation of different models (Kruger, Witziers, & Sleegers, 2007). Towards this direction, this research study seeks to explore the relationship between secondary school leadership in Cyprus and improvement in student citizenship outcomes. The more specific research questions are as follows: 1.Is there a direct relationship between secondary school leadership, as defined in the Pashiardis-Brauckmann Holistic Leadership Framework, and improvement in student citizenship outcomes (cognitive and affective)? 2.Is there an indirect relationship between secondary school leadership and improvement in student citizenship outcomes (cognitive and affective)? If yes, what is the role of school academic optimism and instructional quality as mediating variables? 3.What is the relative strength of the direct and indirect models of school leadership effects upon gains in student citizenship outcomes (cognitive and affective)? 4.What is the total effect of the combined direct and indirect leadership models? This study adopts a comprehensive perspective of leadership by utilizing the Holistic Leadership Framework developed by Pashiardis and Brauckmann (2009). The specific framework has been developed and implemented in seven European countries (UK, Norway, Germany, Slovenia, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands) within the context of the European funded LISA (Leadership Improvement for Student Achievement) project. According to this framework, school principals’ behavior is operationalized in terms of five leadership styles: the Instructional, Participative, Structuring, Entrepreneurial, and Personnel Development Styles. Furthermore, we are interested in investigating through which intermediate variables school leaders affect student citizenship outcomes. A number of variables suggested by the literature are identified within this mediating level. At the school level, a new latent construct labeled School Academic Optimism (McGuigan,& Hoy, 2006) is used. School Academic Optimism represents a schoolwide belief that students will learn and it is made up of three dimensions: academic emphasis, faculty trust, and collective efficacy. At the classroom level, a comprehensive set of indicators of instructional quality is utilized. The variables to be measured emerge from the dynamic model of educational effectiveness of Creemers and Kyriakides (2008) and relate to structuring, orientation, modeling, application, questioning, assessment, management of time and classroom as a learning environment. Student citizenship outcomes (both cognitive and affective) form the dependent variable at the end of the leadership effects chain. A strong impetus to citizenship outcomes is linked to the 2000 Lisbon Objectives in education and training (Commission of the European Communities, 2006; Kerr, & Lopes, 2008). Specifically, civic competence was identified as one of the key competences required by Europeans to acquire by 2010 in order to respond to globalization and the knowledge-based economies.

Commission of the European Communities. (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union L394. Creemers, B.P.M. & Kyriakides, L. (2008). The Dynamics of Educational Effectiveness. A contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. New York: Routledge. Kerr, D. & Lopes, J. (2008, March). Studying Civic and Citizenship Education in the European Context. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, U.S.A. Kruger, M. L., Witziers, B., & Sleegers, P. (2007). The Impact of School Leadership on School Level Factors: Validation of a causal model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 18 (1), 1-20. Kythreotis, A. & Pashiardis, P. (2006, October). Exploring Leadership Role in School Effectiveness and the Validation of Models of Principals’ Effects on Students’ Achievement. Paper presented at the CCEAM Conference “Recreating Linkages between Theory and Praxis in Educational Leadership”, Nicosia, Cyprus. Marzano, R.J. Waters, T., & McNulty, B.A. (2005). School Leadership that Works. From Research to Results. USA: ASCD and MCREL. McGuigan, L. & Hoy, W. (2006). Principal Leadership: Creating a Culture of Academic Optimism to Improve Achievement for All Students. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5, 203-229. Pashiardis, P. & Brauckmann, S. (2009, December). From PISA to LISA: Searching for the right leadership cocktail mix across Europe. Paper presented at the Cyprus Educational Administration Society Conference “The Leader of the 21st century School”, Nicosia, Cyprus. Weindling, D. & Dimmock, C. (2006). Sitting in the “Hot Seat”. New Headteachers in the UK. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(4), 326-340.