Search results

The purpose of this paper is to trace a 40‐year research journey to identify organizational properties that foster the achievement of all students, regardless of socio‐economic status (SES).

The author describes a search for school properties that have an impact on the cognitive and social‐emotional development of faculty and students, with special emphasis on academic achievement.

Three characteristics of schools were identified that make a positive difference for student achievement controlling for the SES: collective efficacy, collective trust in parents and students, and academic emphasis of the school. Further these three measures are elements of a latent construct, academic emphasis of school, which is a powerful predictor of student achievement regardless of SES.

The paper identifies school variables that are often as important, or more important, than SES in explaining academic achievement, and a new model is created to explain how academic optimism influences student achievement.

Rational and open system theories offer divergent sets of tactics on how best to deal with factors outside the boundary of the school. This study compared two competing strategies that emerge from these theories: bridging and buffering. The impact of how schools interact with their environments was examined in relation to student achievement.

The competing theories were operationalized into two survey measures that tapped teacher perceptions of their schools’ orientations toward the environment. Using schools as the unit of analysis, two competing perspectives were contrasted together with their relative impact on student achievement on standardized tests.

Multiple regression was used to assess the relative weight of each of these constructs in explaining the variance in student achievement. Bridging strategies explained a greater proportion of the variance than buffering.

Data were limited to teacher perceptions of the strategies employed by their schools to relate to the external environments. Enactments of these strategies are generally conceived and initiated by school administrators. Schools are dependent on their environments for survival. If the community is perceived as a threat, school leaders will attempt to insulate the technical core of teaching by buffering teachers from environmental disturbances. If, however, the community is perceived as a potential resource, school leaders will attempt to build bridges and create a symbiotic interdependence. Findings suggest that the latter is a more productive strategy for school administrators to employ.

To date, little research has been done on these competing strategies that would guide the practice of school leaders in how to best invest their energies in relation to their external environments.

Principles of cognitive psychology are considered, not primarily as they inform classroom practice, but as they inform school organization and administrative practice in schools. Theories of knowledge as distributed, social, situated, and based on prior beliefs and knowledge are applied to organizational learning within schools. Collaborative problem solving is explored as a means that schools might employ to become smarter. The study is situated within a Midwestern high school that is striving to improve itself. This school employs collaborative strategies to learn and adapt to changed expectations and circumstances. In the school examined, this collaboration is orchestrated through the creation of discourse communities among teachers and cognitive apprenticeships among teachers and administrators.

The conceptual foundations of trust as a multi‐dimensional construct are reviewed, and relevant related issues are discussed with a focus on trust in schools. An empirical analysis of faculty trust in colleagues and trust in the principal demonstrates that faculty trust is an important aspect of the openness and health of school climate. It is related to the authenticity of both the principal’s and the teachers’ behavior; however, elements of climate and behavior that predict trust in the principal are different from those that predict trust in colleagues. Finally, a research agenda for the study of trust in schools is sketched.

This study aims to explore the relationship between principals’ performance on the Pennsylvania Framework for Leadership evaluation tool and the corresponding self-reported degree of self-efficacy and growth mindset.

The data analysis involved linear regression of principal performance on principals’ mindset, moral leadership self-efficacy and instructional self-efficacy scores. Additionally, correlation matrices identified the presence and direction of relationships between self-efficacy levels and the degree of growth mindset reported by principals.

The results demonstrated a positive association between principals’ instructional self-efficacy reports and their overall performance evaluation. Alternatively, both growth mindset and moral leadership self-efficacy evidenced a negative association. There was no association reflected between growth mindset and either the overall self-efficacy measure or the sub-scale self-efficacy measures. A secondary relationship revealed a negative association between school performance profile and growth mindset. This relationship held true in subsequent regression analyses.

The study adds to the limited research available on examining the relationship between principals’ self-efficacy levels and their performance ratings on a common tool.