Brain Hemispheric Characteristics And Leadership
Style Of School
Superintendents
Powell E. Toth
Marshall University Graduate College
Theodora S. Farmer
Knob Elementary School
We are grateful for the loyal support of our subscribers and members that make
this website possible. National FORUM Journals is one of the few professional
journals that provide free access to published articles. Your contribution of any
amount will ensure continued free access to the published articles of our family of
journals. Donations may be sent to: National FORUM Journals, 4000 Lock Lane
Suite 9/KL, Lake Charles, LA 70605
Abstract
This article explores the cognitive processing style and leader style of school superintendents.
Analysis of cognitive processing style and leadership style has been explored in the business
sector, but little analysis in this area has been done n the field of education. This article is based
on a 1997 survey of West Virginia school superintendents.
The analysis of self-perceived cognitive processing style compared to self-perceived leader style has been
studied in the business sector to determine if these areas serve as possible predictors of effective leadership
at the top executive levels of administration (Agor, 1985; Mintzberg, 1976; Peters & Waterman, 1982;
Wonder & Donovan, 1984). Extensive research (Kean, 1989; Norris, 1984; Owen, 1986; Soler, 1991) has
indicated educators need to study leadership as it relates to brain hemisphericity, specifically at the top
executive level of school administration, the office of the superintendent.
The superintendency of schools is a crucial and demanding position in American society because the
individual in this position is the primary influence in the shaping of public education (Soler, 1991). Chief
executive officers of the school districts are required to increase functional organization effectiveness while
adjusting to turbulent changes in the world (Davidson, 1987). Exploratory studies by Coulson and
Strickland (1983), Norris (1984), and Soler (1991) concluded that school district superintendents need
conceptual skills in combination with technical skills to direct the educational system toward new pathways
of change.
Analysis of cognitive processing style, or brain hemisphericity, and leadership style has been explored in
the business sector to determine if this area serves as an indicator for administrative success (Agor, 1984;
Mintzberg, 1976; Peters & Waterman, 1982; Spinola, 1988; Wonder & Donovan, 1984). In order to
analyze the concept of brain dominance and educational leadership, researchers have conducted studies of
right-brain, left-brain thinking and administrative effectiveness (Coulson & Strickland, 1983; Kean, 1989;
Norris, 1984; Peters & Waterman, 1982; Soler, 1991).
Brain hemisphericity, separate cognitive processing styles, can be identified in every individual, as
demonstrated scientifically using electroencephalographic (EEG) techniques (Orstein, 1978). Beginning
with the Greek physician Hippocrates, the concept of the duality of the human brain was introduced
(Herrmann, 1988).
In 1960, neurosurgeon Sperry demonstrated through split brain experiments that the right and left
hemispheres are specialized. He conducted studies of epileptic patients who had undergone division of the
corpus callosum in its entirety (Sperry, 1964). Specific mental abilities are lateralized and coordinated
predominantly in one of these hemispheres (Sperry, 1975). The left side is analytical, verbal, sequential,
concrete, and rational; while the right-brain is intuitive, spontaneous, holistic, visual, and symbolic
(Wonder & Donovan, 1984).
The brain’s two hemispheres can be further organized into four separate and distinct quadrants consisting
of the right and left halves of the neocortex and the right and left divisions of the limbic system (Herrmann,
1988). Four quadrant preferences were identified from Herrmann’s research. Quadrant A is the upper left
cerebral mode reflecting preferences for analyzing, solving problems logically, and getting facts. Quadrant
B, lower left limbic mode, preferences include organizing, arranging, attention to detail, being procedural,
precise, and seeking control of the situation (Herrmann, 1988). The upper right quadrant D preferences
include risk-taking, imagination exercises, visionary approaches, and new experiences. This thinking style
is the most productive in industry and education (Peschanel, 1988). C quadrant, the lower right limbic
mode, reflects emotional, spiritual, intuitive preferences surrounding interpersonal experiences (Herrmann,
1988).
Fibers that carry the signals of communication to different parts of the brain, the connectors, are divided
into those that are links within each hemisphere and those that are links between the hemispheres
(Sylwester, 1995). The corpus callosum connects the two cerebral hemispheres and, without this vital
bridge, the brain has no way of integrating one mode of awareness with its complement, such as developing
a verbal concept from a visual image (Gazzaniga, 1975). In the 1960s, Sperry, along with his associates
Bogen, Gazzaniga, and Levy, from the California Institute of Technology, designed a set of tests to isolate
and reveal the functions of each hemisphere. This information has revolutionized the understanding of the
human brain and earned Sperry a Nobel Prize in 1981 (Gazzaniga, 1975; Levy, 1983).
Torrance (1982) conducted interdisciplinary research that recognized the importance of two kinds of
information processing that seem to parallel the specialized cerebral functions of the left and right
hemispheres. Measures of creative style tend to be positively and significantly related to the right side of
the brain (Gowan, 1979). The left hemisphere seems to be specialized for the logical, sequential processing
style and deals primarily with verbal, analytical, temporal, and digital materials. The right cerebral
hemisphere functions nonlinearly and holistically, simultaneously dealing with a variety of variables and
different kinds of information. It is specialized for nonverbal, spatial, emotional, and aesthetic materials
(Gazzaniga, 1975).
In 1977, Torrance administered a series of tests including his test of creative thinking measuring fluency,
flexibility, originality, and creative strengths to 33 graduate students, 13 males and 20 females, enrolled in
his class. He determined that a statistically significant relationship exists between innovation and the right
hemisphere style of learning and thinking (Torrance & Horng, 1980). An abundance of literature has
indicated that an individual’s brain hemispheric processing mode is directly related to that individual’s
learning style (Campbell, 1989; Herrmann, 1982A; Jung, 1923; McCarthy, 1991; Torrance & Horng,
1980). These data, combined with research on the human mind and brain, make a compelling case for our
school leaders to seriously promote integrative education. Education administrators need to examine
traditional programs that ignore one-half of the brain, the long ignored right side (Walker, 1995). Kovalik
and Olsen (1994) used brain research to help identify eight conditions that create a right and left brain
compatible learning environment. Superintendents and principals can provide support by offering teachers
greater autonomy, including full participation in setting policies on materials selection, scheduling, and
class size. Administrators can create opportunities for reflection and dialogue among teachers on topics
such as standardized testing that addresses competencies developed in an integrative educational setting
(Shoemaker, 1991). More training in whole-brain thinking with transference to everyday life promotes a
citizenry with more self-awareness and understanding of people, issues, culture, and innovation (Key,
1991).
Educators at the higher levels of administration benefit from awareness of cognitive lateral functions and
how to integrate them in their decision making as well as how to promote this approach in the training of
staff personnel (Mitchell & Tucker, 1992). Torrance and Mourad (1979) indicated creativity and
effectiveness result most often from a style of information processing characterized by both hemispheres
functioning in a complementary manner. Whole-brained thinkers assimilate facts and issues adeptly by
seeing the whole picture, thus viewing the multitude of interrelated circumstances that impact
simultaneously one upon another (Carthey, 1993). Superintendents who simultaneously utilize analytic and
intuitive approaches are adept at assimilating these vast and current information sources for orchestrating
both skillful administrative strategies and leading edge curriculum developments (Coulson & Strickland,
1983; Norris, 1984; Soler, 1991). Recent research indicated that at top management levels, right brain and
integrative brain skills characterize effective leaders (Johnson & Daumer, 1993; Spinola, 1988).
Superintendents in current educational climates face complex policy issues, and the complete databases
necessary for left brain processing are not always available, adequate, or financially feasible. Crises arising
from financial constraints, safety issues, societal pressures, or personnel demands make the exclusive use of
the left-brain processes increasingly difficult. Peters and Waterman (1982) reported that the 10 best-run
companies in America encourage the use of intuitive skills and nurture intuition’s development in their
management cultures.
Research has indicated that the most successful and innovative leaders integrate both left and right brain
processing, thus are more amenable to change, are better able to restore energy resources, are more
successful, and are less susceptible to job burnout (Kean, Leary, & Toth, 1993). A right hemispheric
function, emotional/intuitive intelligence, is a key to integrating mental processes. School leaders are in the
people business and the people skills include empathy, graciousness, and the ability to read a social
situation. Researchers indicate about 90% of emotional communication is nonverbal. At the Center for
Creative Leadership failed executives were studied and found to be lacking in emotional/intuitive
processing skills; consequently, they were authoritarian, too ambitious, and lacking in interpersonal
capabilities (Gibbs, 1995).
By understanding the brain’s engineering and operations, one can better utilize its power, become a faster,
more creative thinker, and reduce the stress and tension associated with high-level executive positions such
as the superintendency (Soler, 1991). Mind mapping helps the leader to build mental fitness, especially in
the critical leadership areas of clarity of vision, energy, and persistence (Buzan, 1991). Whole-brain
thinking, resulting from training in integrating the hemispheres, results in excellence in performance of
leaders (Hooper, 1992). The simultaneous use of both processing modes has been demonstrated by subjects
following an instructional set to prepare them to switch between one and the other (Boles, 1989).
Investigative research reveals that both brain hemisphericity and learning style impact upon the individual’s
leadership style (Cameron, 1984; Herrmann, 1982b; Kean, 1989; McCarthy, 1985). Herrmann (1982b)
indicated that information generated from the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument can be directly
related to individual learning and leadership styles. Leaders who use left processing skills develop plans,
think logically, set goals, measure results, and seek solutions. Right processing leaders integrate ideas and
concepts, are strategic global planners, bend policies, and rely on intuition in decision making (Herrmann,
1982b, 1988).
Leaders can be categorized as effective and/or efficient when they are people oriented with styles that
emanate from the right or integrated hemisphere (Mitchell & Tucker, 1992). Efficient leaders’ primary
interest is for individual relationships (Barnard, 1938). Halpin (1957) and Stogdill (1957, 1974) divided
leadership styles into two groups: those exhibiting initiating structure styles and those exhibiting
consideration styles. Initiating structure refers to establishing goals, procedures, schedules, and routines.
These characteristics are indicative of left-brain cognitive processing and refer to task-oriented leaders.
Consideration involves demonstrating concern for people and relationships. This leader style reflects rightbrain cognitive style (Campbell, Corbally, & Nystrand, 1983; Halpin, 1957; Kean, 1989; Stogdill, 1974).
These leadership styles can be described as those of task leaders and social leaders (Hoy & Miskel, 1987).
The task leader establishes organizational goals for the school system and plans activities according to time
tables (Cameron, 1984). The social leader communicates a vision for the system through various groups of
the hierarchical structure (Hoy & Miskel, 1987; McCarthy, 1985).
Leaders who utilize mostly left hemispheric processing techniques, task oriented individuals, have the
following behavior characteristics: determine and record goals; make detailed lists, charts, and graphs; base
solutions on existing models; analyze subordinates’ behavior within the environment; strive to maintain
status quo; work within the system; gather data and extrapolate from facts; need tasks related to desired
outcomes; and evaluate progress (Mintzberg, 1976). Those leaders who prefer right brain processing are
process oriented, view problems as opportunities, consider feelings first, may have difficulty following
through, need quiet time and personal space, promote brainstorming and group decision-making, and take
risks (Mintzberg, 1976). An administrator’s awareness and understanding of brain hemispheric processing
can have implications for decision-making, screening, hiring, and job assignments (Agor, 1984; Piatt,
1983); interpersonal relationships (Agor, 1984); pre-service and in-service training (Coulson & Strickland,
1983); and organizational change (Levy, 1983; Piatt, 1983).
Studies of intuitive awareness among chief executive officers support the importance of intuitive ability to
leadership style (Mintzberg, 1976; Peters & Waterman 1982). Similar studies of educational administrators
have confirmed the importance of this ability being part of an effective leader’s cognitive style. The
consideration style leader who utilizes this cognitive model is creative and visionary in decision-making
(Halpin, 1957; Stogdill, 1974).
Leadership may be viewed as a process through which others are motivated to accomplish goals. The
important elements of leadership are the behavior of the leader, the behavior of the followers, and the
environment of the situation (Owen, 1986). Leader behaviors can be thought of in a two-dimensional
theory: (a) the leader can decide what to do and tell followers how to do it, or (b) the leader can permit
followers to operate freely within limits dictated by things over which he or she has no control (Katz,
1974). The leader who decides and tells has an authoritarian orientation toward followers, whereas the
leader who permits followers to operate freely has a human relationship point of view. Simplified, these
two leadership styles can be identified as being either task-oriented or people-oriented (Hoy & Miskel,
1987).
Leadership style evidenced by a specific leader is a combination of task-oriented behavior and peopleoriented behavior. Some leaders are very task-oriented and some are much more concerned about human
relationships. Most leaders exemplify a balance of the two behaviors somewhere in between (Halpin,
1966). Cartwright and Zander (1960) identified these two characteristics in research on leader behavior.
One dimension is concerned with the achievement of some specific group goal, and the other is concerned
with the maintenance of strengthening of the group itself.
Katz (1974) referred to the dimensions of leadership as employee-orientation and product-orientation.
Likert (1961) used the term employee-centered to describe the focus on human relationship skills with
groups, and the term job-centered in referring to emphasis on achieving group goals. The Ohio State
Leadership Studies, begun by the Bureau of Business Research in 1945, called them initiating structure and
consideration (Stogdill, 1974).
Halpin (1966) used these terms to describe the leader behavior of school superintendents. In his description,
initiating structure refers to the leader’s behavior in delineating the relationship between self and the
members of the work group, and in endeavoring to establish well defined patterns of organization, channels
of communication, and methods of procedure. Consideration refers to behavior indicative of friendship,
mutual trust, respect, and warmth in the relationship between the leader and the members of the staff
(Halpin, 1966).
In order to move from competence to excellence in school systems, leaders must provide symbolic
leadership (Sergiovanni, 1984). Through symbolic leadership, top level education administrators signal and
demonstrate what is valued and what goals override all others. These leaders communicate a vision for
followers. The symbolic school district leader provides a clear and unified vision of the organization, thus
establishing a sense of order and direction (Halpin & Croft, 1967).
The chief executive officer is the focal point and determiner of change in an organization (Weick, 1982). In
times of strategic change, the organization must be able to look to the leader for vision and purpose
(Paulson, 1982; Weick, 1982). The superintendent’s proximity to education personnel and to community
spokespersons provides him/her with opportunity to fulfill the change mission (Owens, 1970).
The many aspects of the school executive’s role and the complex problems which confront school
superintendents require leaders who are capable of making effective decisions that will have positive
outcomes for their school systems. Truly effective leadership results from the integrated processing modes
of logic and intuition, analysis, and conceptualization (Norris, 1984; Soler, 1991).
This study was designed to examine the relationship between preferred brain hemispheric processing, as
established by the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI), of public school superintendents and
their preferred leadership styles, as measured by the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire
(LBDQ). The following hypotheses guided the study:
1.
Public school superintendents who perceive themselves as preferring
predominantly left hemispheric processing will manifest significantly higher selfperceived Initiating Structure scores than superintendents who perceive that their mental
processing is predominantly right hemispheric.
2.
Public school superintendents who perceive themselves as preferring
predominantly right hemispheric processing will manifest significantly higher selfperceived Consideration scores than superintendents who perceive that their mental
processing is predominantly left hemispheric.
The first hypothesis was not supported by the collected data. Only 35% of the superintendents who
perceived themselves as preferring predominantly left hemispheric processing perceived themselves as
being Initiating Structure leadership style. The second hypothesis was supported by the descriptive data.
Eighty-two percent of the superintendents who perceived themselves as preferring predominantly right
hemispheric processing perceived themselves as being Consideration leadership style.
The sample for this study was 55 public school superintendents. A demographic questionnaire, two survey
instruments, and a stamped, self-addressed envelope were mailed to each superintendent.
Two instruments were used to collect data. The first instrument, Herrmann’s Brain Dominance Instrument
(1982), measured self-perceived mental processing in the left and right brain hemispheres. The second
instrument, Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire-Self (1957), measured two different dimensions of
self-perceived leadership behavior. A total of 35 (64%) superintendents returned the questionnaires with a
usable return rate of 33, or 60%. Data generated by the study were assigned response codes, transferred to a
computer file, verified for processing, and statistically analyzed by using the General Linear Model of the
Statistical Analysis System (SAS).
In addition to the survey instruments described, the participants were asked to complete demographic
information related to gender, age, educational level, education experience prior to the superintendency,
and administrative experience as a superintendent. These data were tabulated to identify the "typical"
superintendent in the respondent group.
The average respondent of the group of superintendents was 45 to 65 years of age, had acquired more than
30 hours of study beyond the Master’s Degree, and had over 20 years experience in education. Also, the
average respondent had accumulated less than 10 years experience in the office of superintendent and
governed a school district of 10,000 or fewer students.
Data also revealed that 30 males and 3 females made up the respondent group. Of the males, 16 (53%)
preferred predominantly left hemispheric processing, 9 (30%) preferred right processing, and 5 (17%)
preferred integrated hemisphericity. Of the females, 2 (67%) preferred predominantly right hemispheric
processing, and 1 (33%) preferred predominantly left hemispheric processing.
Further analysis of the data determined that over half of the superintendents (18, 55%), were 45 years of
age or older, and 12 (36%) were over 55 years of age. Fourteen (42%) superintendents had doctorate
degrees, and 18 (55%) had higher than a Master’s + 30 hours. Twenty-six (79%) superintendents had over
25 years of experience in the field of education, and 6 (18%) had up to 25 years.
A majority (18, 55%) of the respondent group superintendents worked in a school district of 5,000 or fewer
student population and 10 (30%) had school districts of 5,000 to 10,000 students. Fourteen (42%)
superintendents had 6 to 10 years experience in the position, 9 (27%) had less than five years experience, 4
(12%) had 16 to 20 years experience, 3 (9%) had 21 to 25 years experience, and 2 (6%) had over 25 years
experience as superintendents.
Public school superintendents who perceived themselves as preferring predominantly left brain hemispheric
processing perceived themselves to be predominantly Consideration leadership style. Public school
superintendents who perceived themselves as preferring predominantly right brain hemispheric processing
perceived themselves to be predominantly Consideration leadership style.
Seventeen superintendents indicated a self-perceived preference for mental processing that was
predominantly left hemispheric, 11 superintendents indicated a self-perceived preference for mental
processing that was predominantly right hemispheric, and 5 superintendents indicated a self-perceived
preference for mental processing that was integrated with equal preference for both hemispheres. Of the 17
superintendents who preferred left hemispheric processing, 10 preferred Consideration style leadership, 6
preferred Initiating Structure, and 1 preferred an integrated leader style. Of the 11 superintendents who
preferred right hemispheric processing, 9 preferred Consideration style leadership and 2 preferred Initiating
Structure style leadership. Of the 5 superintendents who preferred integrated hemispheric processing, 3
preferred Consideration style leadership, 1 preferred Initiating Structure style leadership, and 1 preferred an
integrated leader style.
Of the 3 female superintendents in the respondent group, 2 preferred right hemispheric processing and
Consideration leadership style, while 1 preferred left hemispheric processing and Initiating Structure
leadership style. Two female superintendents were from small school districts of 1,000 to 5,000 students,
while 1 female superintendent was from a larger district of 10,000 to 15,000 student population.
The findings of this study provided data from which a number of conclusions may be drawn through
analysis of the demographic statistics and the surveys utilized. Based on the computed percentages and
frequencies, there appears to be a relationship between superintendents’ self-perceived brain hemispheric
processing and their self-perceived leadership styles in the category of right brain hemisphericity.
Superintendents who preferred right hemispheric processing (conceptual, synthesizer, interpersonal,
holistic) usually demonstrated a preference for Consideration leadership style (people oriented). However,
the majority of superintendents who preferred left hemispheric processing did not demonstrate a preference
for Initiating Structure leadership style (task-oriented).
Some of the literature indicated that individuals who prefer left hemispheric processing will be taskoriented and that individuals who prefer right hemispheric processing will be people-oriented (Agor, 1984;
Herrmann, 1988; Piatt 1983). This study included a small respondent group, therefore it is not valid to
make inferences or generalizations about other populations.
The position of the superintendent has become more politically defined since they must address more
frequently the issues of diverse interest groups (Blumberg & Blumberg, 1985). This may explain why the
respondent group has demonstrated a majority (67%) of people oriented, Consideration style leaders, even
though many (51%) of the respondents demonstrate a preference for left hemispheric processing. These
leaders in education need visionary, people-oriented skills to empower groups to implement constructive
change; 67% of the surveyed superintendents display preferences for people-oriented leadership styles.
Summary
Restructuring of schools is a major focus of today’s educational environments that requires both change
and planning. These crucial elements of moving toward innovative organizational strategies require both
logical, analytical skills (left processing) and conceptual, visionary abilities (right processing) (Herrmann,
1988). School administrators should be trained to identify individuals’ mental styles and assign them the
appropriate tasks.
The Consideration style leader and integrated hemispheric thinker embodies the skills to champion the
vision for the future of education. This leader works with the group to set goals to give substance to the
educators’ dreams and empowers the group to accept the vision as its own. Policy formation, site-based
management, and organizational change are all facets of the movement in education to implement the
national impetus to better prepare students for the society of the next century. Knowledge, training, and
awareness of mental processing styles and leader styles and how they impact administrative effectiveness
could assure a positive movement forward to the accomplishment of that goal.
References
Agor, W.H. (1984). Intuitive management: Integrating left and right brain management skills. Englewood Cliffs, NH:
Prentice-Hall.
Agor, W.H. (1985). Managing brain skills to increase productivity. Public Administration Review, 45, 864-869.
Barnard, C.I. (1938). Mind in everyday affairs. Lecture at Princeton University. In C. Barbard (1968) Functions of the executive.
MA: Harvard University Press.
Blumberg, A., & Blumberg, P. (1985). The school superintendent living with conflict. New York: Teachers College Press.
Boles, D. (1989). Word attributes and lateralization revisited: Implications for dual coding and discrete versus continuous
processing. Memory and Cognition, 17(1), 106-114.
Buzan, T. (1991). Train your brain: Mental literacy skills in the workplace. Management Review, 80(28), 53-54.
Cameron, K. (1984). The paradox in institutional renewal. Leadership and institutional renewal: Jossey-Bass. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service, 357-351)
Campbell, R., Corbally, J., & Nystrand, R. (1983). Introduction to educational administration (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Campbell, J. (1989). The improbable machine. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Carthey, J. (1973). Relationship between learning styles and academic achievement and brain hemispheric dominance and
academic performance in business. MS thesis, Winona State University.
Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. (1960). Group dynamics: Research and theory (2nd ed.). Evanston: Row, Peterson, & Company.
Coulson, L.T., & Strickland, A.G. (1983). The minds at the top: An analysis of the thinking style preferences of superintendents of
schools and chief executive officers. Journal of Creative Behavior, 17, 163-174.
Davidson, J.L. (1987). The superintendency: Leadership for effective schools. Jackson: Kelwynn Press.
Gazzaniga, M. (1975). Review of the split brain. Journal of Neurology, 209, 75-79.
Gibbs, N. (1995, October). The EQ factor. Time, 60-68.
Gowan, J.C. (1979). The production of creativity through right hemisphere imagery. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 13, 3951.
Halpin, A.W. (1957). Manual for the leader behavior description questionnaire. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
Halpin, A.W. (1966). Theory and research in administration. New York: Macmillian.
Halpin, A., & Croft, D. (1967). The organizational climate of schools. US Office of Education Project, 543-8639.
Herrmann, N. (1982a). The creative brain. NASSP Bulletin, 66, 31-46.
Herrmann, N. (1982b). The brain and management learning. The Bureaucrat, 11, 17-20.
Herrmann, N. (1988). The creative brain. Lake Lure, NC: Brain Books.
Hooper, D. (1992). Success depends on leaders’ whole brain thinking. School Administrator, 49(6), 14-17.
Hoy, W.K., & Miskel, C.G. (1987). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). New York: Random
House.
Johnson, P.R., & Daumer, C.R. (1993). Intuitive development: Communication in the nineties-developing the right brain
hemisphere. Public Personnel Management, 22, 257-268.
Jung, C. (1923). Psychological types. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.
Katz, R.L. (1974). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 52(5), 90-102.
Kean, B. (1989). The relationship between school principals’ self-perceived hemispheric processing modes and their self-perceived
leadership styles. (Doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University, 1989). Dissertation Abstract International.
Kean, B., Leary, P., & Toth, P. (1992-93). School principals, left-brain, right-brain leadership. National FORUM of Applied
Educational Research Journal, 5(2), 69-73.
Key, N. (1991). Research and methodologies for whole-brained integration at the secondary level. Report prepared for Teacher
Researchers, September 1991. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 347-141)
Kovalik, S., & Olsen, K. (1994). ITI: The model, integrated thematic instruction (3rd ed.). Kent, WA: Books for Education.
Levy, J. (1983). Research synthesis on right and left hemispheres: We think with both halves. Educational Leadership, 40, 66-71.
Likert, R. (1961). New patterns in management. New York: McGraw Hill.
McCarthy, B. (1985). What 4Mat training teaches us about staff development. Educational Leadership, 42, 61-68.
Mintzberg, H. (1976). Planning on the left side and managing on the right. Harvard Business Review, 54, 59-68.
Mitchell, D., & Tucker, S. (1992). Leadership as a way of thinking. Educational Leadership, 49(5), 30-35.
Norris, C. (1984). A discussion of brain hemisphere characteristics and creative leadership among selected educational
administrators in Tennessee. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee, 1984). Dissertation Abstracts International.
Orstein, R. (1978). The split and the whole-brain. Human Nature, 1, 76-83.
Owen, G.B. (1986). The relationship of left-right brain dominance, administrative experience, and mentorship to the leadership
style of elementary school principals. (Doctoral dissertation East Texas State University). Dissertations Abstracts International,
47, 04a.
Owens, R.G. (1970). Organizational behavior in schools. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Paulson, R.D. (1982). The chief executive as change agent. Management Review, 71(2), 25-42.
Peschanel, F. (1988). Brain dominance and productivity. International Brain Dominance Review, 5(2), 6-11.
Peters, T.J., & Waterman, R.H. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper & Row.
Piatt, J.G. (1983). Brain processing preferences: Key to an organizations success. NASSP Bulletin, 67, 64-69.
Sergiovanni, T. (1984). Leadership and excellence in schooling. Educational Leadership, 41(5), 4-13.
Shoemaker, B. (1991). Education 2000: Integrated curriculum. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(10), 793-97
Soler, E. (1991). Brain hemispheric characteristics and leadership style of selected school superintendents in Texas. (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Texas, 1991). Dissertation Abstracts International.
Sperry, R.W. (1964). The great cerebral commissure. Scientific American, 210, 42-52.
Sperry, R.W. (1975). Left-brain, right-brain. Saturday Review, 2, 30-33.
Spinola, R. (1988). Characteristics of corporate cultures as expressed by brain dominances. International Brain Dominance
Review, 5(2), 22-28.
Stogdill, R.M., & Coons, A.E. (1957). Leadership behavior: Its description and measurement. Columbus: Ohio State
University.
Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership. New York: The Free Press.
Sylwester, R. (1995). An educator’s guide to the human brain: A celebration of neurons. New York: ASCD.
Torrance, E.P. (1982). Hemisphercity and creative functioning. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 15, 29-37.
Torrance, E.P., & Horng, R.Y. (1980). Creativity and style of learning and thinking characteristics of adaptors and innovators.
The Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, V, 80-85.
Torrance E.P., & Mourad, S. (1979). Role of hemisphericity in performance on selected measures of creativity. The Gifted Child
Quarterly, 23(1), 44-45.
Walker, D. (1995). Integrative education. Research and Roundup, 12(1), 1-4.
Weick, K.E. (1982). Administering education in loosely coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 63(10), 673.
Wonder, J., & Donovan, P. (1984). Whole brain thinking. New York: Ballantine.