Purpose: This study aimed to estimate the impact of collective, or shared, leadership on key teacher variables and on student achievement. As well, it inquired about the relative contribution of different sources of such leadership and whether differences among patterns of collective leadership were related to differences in student achievement.
Methods: Evidence included 2,570 teacher responses from 90 elementary and secondary schools in which four or more teachers completed usable surveys. Student achievement data in language and math averaged over 3 years were acquired through school Web sites. Data were analyzed using path-analytic techniques.
Findings: Collective leadership explained a significant proportion of variation in student achievement across schools. Higher-achieving schools awarded leadership influence to all school members and other stakeholders to a greater degree than that of lower-achieving schools. These differences were most significant in relation to the leadership exercised by school teams, parents, and students. Principals were awarded the highest levels of influence in schools at all levels of achievement.
Implications: Influence seems to be an infinite resource in schools. The more those in formal leadership roles give it away, the more they acquire.
Beck, L., & Murphy, J. (1998). Site-based management and school success: Untangling the variables. School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 9(4), 349-357.
5.
Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M.W. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change: Volume 7. Factors affecting implementation and continuation . Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
6.
Bidwell, C., Frank, K., &Quiroz, P. (1997). Teacher types, workplace controls, and the organization of schools. Sociology of Education, 70(4), 285-308.
7.
Bryk, A. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform: Democratic localism as a lever for change. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
8.
Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools. New York : Russell Sage Foundation
9.
Burke, C.S., Fiore, S.M., & Salas, E. (2003). The role of shared cognition in enabling shared leadership and team adaptability. In C. J. Pearce & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the how and whys of leadership (pp. 103-122). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Cobb, P., McClain, K., Lamberg, T., & Dean, C. (2003). Situating teachers' instructional practices in the institutional setting of the school and the district. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 13-24.
11.
Cox, J.F., Pearce, C.L., & Perry, M.L. (2003). Toward a model of shared leadership and distributed influence in the innovation process: How shared leadership can enhance new product development, teach dynamics and self effectiveness. In C. L. Pearce & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 48-76). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
Desimone, L.M. (2006). Consider the sources: Response differences among teachers, principals and districts on survey questions about their education policy environment. Educational Policy, 20(4), 640-676.
13.
Dunlap, D.M., & Goldman, P. (1991). Rethinking power in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(1), 5-29.
14.
Firestone, W. (1989). Using reform: Conceptualizing district initiative . Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2), 151-164.
15.
Firestone, W.A., & Martinez, M.C. (2007). Districts, teacher leaders, and distributed leadership: Changing instructional practice. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 3-35
16.
Ford, M. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and personal agency beliefs. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M.H. (1998). Seeing as situated activity: Formulating planes . In Y. Engestrom & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 61-95). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 653-696). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
19.
Gronn, P. (2003). The new work of educational leaders: Changing leadership practices in an era of school reform. London : Paul Chapman.
20.
Grubb, W.N., & Flessa, J.J. (2006). "A job too big for one": Multiple principals and other nontraditional approaches to school leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(4), 518-550.
21.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5-44.
22.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (2002). What do you call people with visions? The role of vision, mission, and goals in school leadership and improvement. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 9-40). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
23.
Harris, A., & Lambert, L. (2003). Building leadership capacity for school improvement . Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
24.
Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1998). Convergent activities: Line control and passenger information on the London Underground. In Y. Engestrom & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 96-129). Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Hiller, N.J., Day, D.V., & Vance, R.J. (2006). Collective enactment of leadership roles and team effectiveness: A field study. Leadership Quarterly, 17(4), 387-397.
26.
Hoy, W.K., Tarter, C.J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2006). Academic optimism of schools: A force for student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 425-446.
27.
Huberman, M. (1988). Teacher careers and school improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20, 119-132.
28.
Hutchins, E. (1996). Organizing work by adaptation. In J. R. Meindl, C. Stubbart , & J. F. Porac (Eds.), Cognition within and between organizations (pp. 368-404). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
Jaques, E. (2003). Ethics for management. Management Communications Quarterly, 17(1), 136-142.
Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (1985). Models of teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
32.
Kushman, J. (1992). The organizational dynamics of teacher workplace commitment: A study of urban elementary and middle schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(1), 5-42.
33.
Leithwood, K., & Duke, D. (1999). A century's quest to understand school leadership . In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 45-72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). The relative effects of principal and teacher sources of leadership on student engagement with school. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(Suppl.), 679-706.
35.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of different sources of leadership on student engagement in school. In K. Riley & K. Louis (Eds.), Leadership for change and school reform (pp. 50-66). London: Routledge.
36.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). A review of transformational school literature research, 1996-2005. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
37.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 201-227.
38.
Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., Earl, L., Watson, N., Levin, B., & Fullan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership for large-scale reform: The case of England's national literacy and numeracy strategies. Journal of School Leadership and Management, 24(1), 57-80.
39.
Leithwood, K., & Levin, B. (2005). Assessing school leader and leadership programme effects on pupil learning (Report No. RR662). London, UK: Department for Education and Skills.
40.
Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. S. (Eds.). (1999). Organizational learning in schools. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
41.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning: A review of research for the Learning From Leadership Project. New York: Wallace Foundation.
42.
Linn, R. (2003). Accountability: Responsibility and reasonable expectations. Educational Researcher, 32(7), 3-13.
43.
Locke, E.A. (2002). The leaders as integrator: The case of Jack Welch at General Electric. In L. L. Neider & C. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership (pp. 1-22). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
44.
Locke, E.A. (2003). Leadership: Starting at the top. In C. J. Pearce & C. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 271-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45.
Louis, K., & Miles, M.B. (1990). Improving the urban high school: What works and why. New York: Teachers College Press.
46.
Louis, K.S., Toole, J., & Hargreaves, A. (1999). Rethinking school improvement . In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed., pp. 251-276). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
47.
Ma, X., & Willms, J.D. (2004). School disciplinary climate: Characteristics and effects on eighth grade achievement. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 169-188.
48.
Manz, C.C., & Sims, H.P., Jr. (1993). Business without bosses. New York: Wiley.
49.
Mayrowetz, D., Murphy, J., Louis, K.S., & Smylie, M. (2007). Distributed leadership as work redesign: Retrofitting the job characteristics model. Leadership and Policy in Schools , 6(1), 69-101.
50.
McMahon, T., & Perritt, G.W. (1971). The control structure of organizations: An empirical examination. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 327-340.
51.
Miller, R.J., & Rowan, B. (2006). Effects of organic management on student achievement . American Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 219-253.
52.
Mohrman, S.A., & Lawler, E.E., III. (1996). Motivation for school reform. In S. H. Fuhrman & J. A. O'Day (Eds.), Rewards and reform: Creating educational incentives that work (pp. 115-143). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
53.
Newell, A., Rosenblum, P., & Laird, J. (1990). Symbolic architecture for cognition. In M. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 93-131). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54.
Ogawa, R.T., & Bossert, S.T. (1995). Leadership as an organizational quality. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31, 224-243.
55.
Pearce, C.J., & Conger, C. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56.
Perkins, N. (1993). Person-plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88-110). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
57.
Pounder, D., Ogawa, R., & Adams, E. (1995). Leadership as an organization-wide phenomena: Its impact on school performance. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(4), 564-588.
58.
Ray, T., Clegg, S., & Gordon, R. (2004). A new look at dispersed leadership: Power, knowledge and context. In L. Storey (Ed.), Leadership in organizations: Current issues and key trends (pp. 319-336). London: Routledge.
59.
Reyes, P. (1990). Teachers and their workplace: Commitment, performance, and productivity in educational organizations. San Francisco : Sage.
60.
Rosenholtz, S.J. (1989). Teachers' workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.
61.
Rowan, B. (1990). Commitment of control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools. Review of Research in Education, 16, 353-389.
62.
Rowan, B. (1996). Standards as incentives for instructional reform . In S. H. Fuhrman & J. J. O'Day (Eds.), Rewards and reform: Creating educational incentives that work (pp. 195-225). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
63.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1990). The architecture of mind: A connectionist approach . In M. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 133-159). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
64.
Salomon, G. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
65.
Shedd, J., & Bacharach, S. (1991). Tangled hierarchies: Teachers as professionals and the management of schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
66.
Smylie, M.A. (1990). Teacher efficacy at work. In P. Reyes (Ed.), Teachers and their workplace (pp. 48-66). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
67.
Spillane, J.P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
68.
Spillane, J.P., Camburn, E.M., & Stitziel Pareja, A. (2007). Taking a distributed perspective to the school principal's work day. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 103-125.
69.
Talbert, J.E., & McLaughlin, M.W. (1993). Understanding teaching in context. In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin, & J. E. Talbert (Eds.), Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice (pp. 167-206). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
70.
Tannenbaum, A.S. (1961). Control and effectiveness in a voluntary organization . American Journal of Sociology, 67(1), 33-46.
71.
Timperley, H. (2005). Distributed leadership: Developing theory from practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(4), 395-420.
72.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
73.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W.K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning and measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 70(4), 547-593.
74.
Tsoukas, H. (2005). Complex knowledge. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
75.
van den Berg, R., Vandenberghe, R., & Sleegers, P. (1999). Management of innovations from a cultural-individual perspective. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(3), 321-351.
76.
Vermunt, J.D., & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching . Learning and Instruction, 9, 257-280.
77.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W.M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
78.
Wheatley, M.J. (2005). Finding our way: Leadership for an uncertain time . San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler .
79.
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research , 74(3), 255-316.
