Focusing on rural school superintendents in New York State public school districts, this study examined the nexus between their leadership behaviors and the academic achievement levels of students within their districts. The study used a causal-comparative research design, also called an "ex-post facto design" (Isaac & Michael, 1995), to examine superintendent leadership behaviors in alignment with the three leadership constructs--transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidant--that make up the full-range leadership model (Avolio & Bass, 2004; Bass, 1998). These superintendent leadership behaviors were analyzed to determine if they explain differences in student achievement. The sample within the study was comprised of rural district superintendents in high-achieving "Reward" districts and rural district superintendents in low-achieving "Focus" districts. The primary instrumentation tool utilized was the third edition Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) 5X, which was completed by the superintendents rating their own leadership behaviors and their corresponding principals rating the superintendents. The results of the study did not show the difference in mean frequency levels to be statistically significant. The study did find some trends in the data including higher frequency levels exhibited by Reward superintendents for transformational leadership behaviors and lower frequency levels of transactional and passive-avoidant behaviors when compared to Focus district superintendents. The absence of statistical significance combined with information discovered in the exploration of the literature and research on the rural superintendency inspired an exploratory data analysis (EDA) that analyzed two additional variables: Combined Wealth Ratio (CWR) and years of experience as a superintendent. A binary logistic regression was used in the EDA to analyze these two additional variables along with the other full-range leadership model sub-components and their association to the Reward and Focus school district distinction. The data analysis also showed distinct differences in behavioral frequency levels when comparing Reward superintendents (ratees) and their principals (raters). Additional independent sample t-tests were run in the EDA to analyze these frequency differences. Within the EDA t-test, the passive-avoidant sub-component laissez-faire (LF) was identified as exhibiting a significant difference (p-value .039) when comparing the behavioral frequency level difference between the Reward superintendents and their principals. Within the EDA regression, CWR was identified as a significant (p-value .004) predictor variable for a district being recognized with the Reward distinction. A one-unit increase in CWR increased the odds of being classified as a Reward district by 581.94. The results from the study produced implications for practice that included the importance of rural superintendents periodically self-analyzing their leadership behavioral outputs to ensure what they believe they are displaying is really what is being perceived by their principals. The value of rural superintendents exhibiting behaviors embedded within all three of the full-range leadership model constructs in lieu of just focusing on transformational leadership behaviors was also analyzed in the implications section. Lastly, the study reviewed the substantial power of wealth on student performance. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]