Purpose: While the literature includes multiple studies on the relationship between school leadership and instructional quality, they often use instructional practice as a continuous variable, assuming that a teacher would perform all sub-dimensions of instructional practice at a similar rate and failing to link distributed leadership to classroom teaching. Addressing these gaps in the literature, this study aims to identify teacher- and school-level latent profiles of teachers’ instructional practices and to investigate how distributed leadership predicts teachers’ membership in different instructional practice profiles, with the mediating role of teacher collaboration. Research Methods/Approach: The study employed a cross-sectional survey design using Türkiye's TALIS data for lower secondary education. Multilevel latent profile analysis with mediation modeling was conducted on data from 3,223 teachers in 192 schools. Findings: This analysis yielded four teacher profiles: laissez-faire, typical, controlling, and versatile; and two school profiles, high controlling and high laissez-faire. Findings indicate that distributed leadership promotes professional collaboration in lessons among teachers, which could, in turn, play a critical role in determining both individual teacher- and school-level profiles. Implications: This study provides practical contributions to understanding the nature of classroom teaching, suggesting that future studies should use instructional practice profiles instead of a single construct of teaching.
AgasistiT.BowersA. J.SoncinM. (2019). School principals’ leadership types and student achievement in the Italian context: Empirical results from a three-step latent class analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47(6), 860–886. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218768577
2.
AhnJ.BowersA. J.WeltonA. D. (2021). Leadership for learning as an organization-wide practice: Evidence on its multilevel structure and implications for educational leadership practice and research. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–53. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2021.1972162
3.
AltinyelkenH. K. (2011). Student-centred pedagogy in Turkey: Conceptualisations, interpretations and practices. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), 137–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.504886
AmelsJ.KrügerM. L.SuhreC. J. M.van VeenK. (2020). The effects of distributed leadership and inquiry-based work on primary teachers’ capacity to change: Testing a model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 31(3), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1746363
6.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. (2015). Residual associations in latent class and latent transition analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(2), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.935844
7.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
8.
BaumertJ.KunterM.BlumW.BrunnerM.VossT.JordanA.TsaiY. M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209345157
9.
BaumrindD. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monographs, 4(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030372
10.
BellibaşMŞGümüşS.LiuY. (2021). Does school leadership matter for teachers’ classroom practice? The influence of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on instructional quality. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32(3), 387–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1858119
11.
BellibaşMŞKılınçAÇPolatcanM. (2021). The moderation role of transformational leadership in the effect of instructional leadership on teacher professional learning and instructional practice: An integrated leadership perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 57(5), 776–814. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211035079
12.
BellibaşMŞPolatcanM.KılınçAÇ (2022). Linking instructional leadership to teacher practices: The mediating effect of shared practice and agency in learning effectiveness. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(5), 812–831. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220945706
13.
BernsteinD. A. (2021). Teaching styles and troublesome students. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 62(4), 367–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000279
14.
BlömekeS.KaiserG.KönigJ.JentschA. (2020). Profiles of mathematics teachers’ competence and their relation to instructional quality. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52(2), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01128-y
15.
BolmanL. G.DealT. E. (1997). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
16.
BowersA. J. (2020). Examining a congruency-typology model of leadership for learning using two-level latent class analysis with TALIS 2018. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 219, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/c963073b-en.
17.
BowersA. J.BlitzM.ModesteM.SalisburyJ.HalversonR. (2017). Is there a typology of teacher and leader responders to CALL, and do they cluster in different types of schools? A two-level latent class analysis of CALL survey data. Teachers College Record, 119(4), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811711900408
18.
BowersA. J.WhiteB. R. (2014). Do principal preparation and teacher qualifications influence different types of school growth trajectories in Illinois? A growth mixture model analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 705–736. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-12-2012-0134
19.
BoyceJ.BowersA. J. (2018). Different levels of leadership for learning: Investigating differences between teachers individually and collectively using multilevel factor analysis of the 2011–2012 schools and staffing survey. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(2), 197–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2016.1139187
20.
BrykA.CamburnE.LouisK. S. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(5), 751–781. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X99355004
21.
BrykA. S.SebringP. B.AllensworthE.LuppescuS.EastonJ. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. University of Chicago.
22.
ChenW. L.ElchertD.Asikin-GarmagerA. (2020). Comparing the effects of teacher collaboration on student performance in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 50(4), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1528863
23.
ChoiA. Y.IsraelT.Nylund-GibsonK. (2020). Syndemic behavioral risk and suicidality among bisexual adolescents: A latent class analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 88(7), 597–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000500
24.
CollieR. J.MartinA. J.MorinA. J.MalmbergL. E.SammonsP. (2021). A multilevel person-centered examination of teachers’ workplace experiences: Replication and extension with links to instructional support and achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(711173), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.711173
25.
Darling-HammondL. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
26.
DayC.GuQ.SammonsP. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X15616863
27.
DecristanJ.KliemeE.KunterM.HochweberJ.BüttnerG.FauthB.HardyI. (2015). Embedded formative assessment and classroom process quality: How do they interact in promoting science understanding?American Educational Research Journal, 52(6), 1133–1159. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215596412
28.
DeMatthewsD. E. (2014). Principal and teacher collaboration: An exploration of distributed leadership in professional learning communities. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 2(2), 176–206. https://doi.org/10.4471/ijelm.2014.16
29.
DoğanS.YurtsevenN. (2018). Professional learning as a predictor for instructional quality: A secondary analysis of TALIS. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29(1), 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2017.1383274
30.
DuffM.BowersA. J. (2022). Identifying a typology of New York City schools through teacher perceptions of organizational capacity: A latent class analysis. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21(4), 791–815. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1854789
31.
DuyarI.GumusS.BellibasM. S. (2013). Multilevel analysis of teacher work attitudes: The influence of principal leadership and teacher collaboration. International Journal of Educational Management, 27(7), 700–719. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2012-0107
32.
FauthB.DecristanJ.DeckerA. T.BuettnerG.HardyI.KliemeE.KunterM. (2019). The effects of teacher competence on student outcomes in elementary science education: The mediating role of teaching quality. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102882
33.
FirestoneW. A.Cecilia MartinezM. (2007). Districts, teacher leaders, and distributed leadership: Changing instructional practice. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760601091234
34.
FlungerB.TrautweinU.NagengastB.LüdtkeO.NiggliA.SchnyderI. (2021). Using multilevel mixture models in educational research: An illustration with homework research. The Journal of Experimental Education, 89(1), 209–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2019.1652137
35.
GeijselF. P.SleegersP. J. C.StoelR. D.KrügerM. L. (2009). The effect of teacher psychological and school organizational and leadership factors on teachers’ professional learning in Dutch schools. Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 406–427. https://doi.org/10.1086/593940
36.
GelbalS.KeleciogluH. (2007). Teachers’ proficiency perceptions of the measurement and evaluation techniques and the problems they convey. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 135–145.
37.
GoddardR.GoddardY.KimE.MillerR. (2015). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the roles of instructional leadership, teacher collaboration, and collective efficacy beliefs in support of student learning. American Journal of Education, 121(4), 501–530. https://doi.org/10.1086/681925
38.
GoddardY.GoddardR.Tschannen-MoranM. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877–896. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810710900401
39.
GoddardY.KimM. (2018). Examining connections between teacher perceptions of collaboration, differentiated instruction, and teacher efficacy. Teachers College Record, 120(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000102
40.
GoldsteinJ. (2004). Making sense of distributed leadership: The case of peer assistance and review. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(2), 173–197. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737026002173
41.
GreenwaldR.HedgesL. V.LaineR. D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170528
GumusS.BellibasM. S.EsenM.GumusE. (2018). A systematic review of studies on leadership models in educational research from 1980 to 2014. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216659296
44.
HallingerP. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111116699
45.
HanushekE. A.KainJ.O’BrienD.RivkinS. G. (2005). The market for teacher quality. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w11154
46.
HargreavesA. (2019). Teacher collaboration: 30 years of research on its nature, forms, limitations and effects. Teachers and Teaching, 25(5), 603–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2019.1639499
47.
HarrisA. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or misleading?Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143204039297
48.
HarrisA. (2005). Leading or misleading? Distributed leadership and school improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(3), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500038602
49.
HarrisA. (2008). Distributed leadership: According to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230810863253
50.
HarrisA.DeFlaminisJ. (2016). Distributed leadership in practice: Evidence, misconceptions and possibilities. Management in Education, 30(4), 141–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020616656734
51.
HarrisA.LeithwoodK.DayC.SammonsP.HopkinsD. (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 337–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-007-9048-4
HayesA. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360
55.
HayesA. F.PreacherK. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multi-categorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67(3), 451–470. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12028
56.
HayesA. F.RockwoodN. J. (2017). Regression-based statistical mediation and moderation analysis in clinical research: Observation, recommendations, and implementation. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 98, 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2016.11.001
57.
HeckR. H.HallingerP. (2009). Assessing the contribution of distributed leadership to school improvement and growth in math achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 659–689. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209340042
58.
HeckR. H.HallingerP. (2010). Testing a longitudinal model of distributed leadership effects on school improvement. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 867–885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.07.013
59.
HeckR. H.HallingerP. (2014). Modeling the longitudinal effects of school leadership on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 653–681. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2013-0097
60.
HenryK. L.MuthénB. (2010). Multilevel latent class analysis: An application of adolescent smoking typologies with individual and contextual predictors. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511003659342
61.
HiebertJ.GrouwsD. (2007). The effect of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In LesterF. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Information Age Publishing.
62.
HospelV.GalandB. (2016). Are both classroom autonomy support and structure equally important for students’ engagement? A multilevel analysis. Learning and Instruction, 41, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.001
63.
KalmanM.ArslanM. C. (2016). School principals’ evaluations of their instructional leadership behaviours: Realities vs. Ideals. School Leadership & Management, 36(5), 508–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2016.1247049
KılınçAÇErE.BeycioğluK. (2021). Mapping the terrain of training and appointment of educational leaders in the turkish context: An historical perspective. In SamierE.ElKalehE.HammadW. (Eds.), Internationalisation of educational administration and leadership curriculum (pp. 139–157). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83909-864-220211009
67.
KlukasE.DraperE.KaseweterK.GregoireN.CioeJ. (2021). The impact of parenting style on attitudes toward masturbation: A latent profile analysis. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 182(6), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2021.1948386
68.
KlusmannU.KunterM.TrautweinU.LüdtkeO.BaumertJ. (2008). Teachers’ occupational well-being and quality of instruction: The important role of self-regulatory patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 702–715. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.702
69.
KoşarS.SezginF.AslanH. (2013). School administrators’ views on assignments out of their job definition. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 33(1), 147–164.
70.
Kowalczuk-WalędziakM.LopesA.MenezesI.TormentaN. (2017). Teachers pursuing a doctoral degree: Motivations and perceived impact. Educational Research, 59(3), 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2017.1345287
71.
KwanP. (2020). Is transformational leadership theory passé? Revisiting the integrative effect of instructional leadership and transformational leadership on student outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(2), 321–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19861137
72.
LeeJ.RheeD. E.RudolfR. (2019). Teacher gender, student gender, and primary school achievement: Evidence from ten Francophone African Countries. The Journal of Development Studies, 55(4), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2018.1453604
73.
LeithwoodK.HarrisA.HopkinsD. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077
74.
LeithwoodK.PattenS.JantziD. (2010). Testing a conception of how school leadership influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 671–706. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X10377347
75.
LeithwoodK.Seashore-LouisK.AndersonS.WahlstromK. (2004). How leadership influences student learning: A review of research for the learning from leadership project. Wallace Foundation.
76.
LipowskyF.RakoczyK.PauliC.Drollinger-VetterB.KliemeE.ReusserK. (2009). Quality of geometry instruction and its short-term impact on students’ understanding of the pythagorean theorem. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 527–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.11.001
77.
LiuY. (2021). Distributed leadership practices and student science performance through the four-path model: Examining failure in underprivileged schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(4), 472–492. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-07-2020-0159
78.
LiuY.WerblowJ. (2019). The operation of distributed leadership and the relationship with organizational commitment and job satisfaction of principals and teachers: A multi-level model and meta-analysis using the 2013 TALIS data. International Journal of Educational Research, 96, 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.05.005
79.
LouisK. S.MayrowetzD.SmileyM.MurphyJ. (2009). The role of sensemaking and trust in developing distributed leadership. In HarrisA. (Ed.), Distributed leadership (pp. 157–180). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9737-9_9
MacKinnonD. P.LockwoodC. M.HoffmanJ. M.WestS. G.SheetsV. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83
82.
MäkikangasA.TolvanenA.AunolaK.FeldtT.MaunoS.KinnunenU. (2018). Multilevel latent profile analysis with covariates: Identifying job characteristics profiles in hierarchical data as an example. Organizational Research Methods, 21(4), 931–954. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118760690
83.
MalloyJ.LeithwoodK. (2017). Effects of distributed leadership on school academic press and student achievement. In LeithwoodK.SunJ.PollockK. (Eds.), How school leaders contribute to student success (pp. 69–91). Springer.
84.
MarksH. M.PrintyS. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X03253412
85.
MarshH.OliverL.NagengastB.TrautweinU.MorinA.AbduljabbarA.KollerO. (2012). Classroom climate and contextual effects: Conceptual and methodological issues in the evaluation of group-level effects. Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.670488
86.
MarzanoR. J.PickeringD. J.PollockJ. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. ASCD.
87.
MascallB.LeithwoodK.StrausT.SacksR. (2008). The relationship between distributed leadership and teachers’ academic optimism. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 214–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230810863271
88.
MayrowetzD. (2008). Making sense of distributed leadership: Exploring the multiple usages of the concept in the field. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(3), 424–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X07309480
89.
MayrowetzD.MurphyJ.LouisK. S.SmylieM. A. (2007). Distributed leadership as work redesign: Retrofitting the job characteristics model. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 69–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760601091275
90.
MayrowetzD.SmylieM. A. (2004). Work redesign that works for teachers. In SmylieM. A.MiretzyD. (Eds.), Teacher workforce development. The one hundred and third yearbook of the national society for the study of education (Part I, pp. 274–302). National Society for the Study of Education.
91.
MayrowetzD.WeinsteinC. S. (1999). Sources of leadership for inclusive education: Creating schools for all children. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 423–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131619921968626
MooreS. A.DowdyE.Nylund-GibsonK.FurlongM. J. (2019). A latent transition analysis of the longitudinal stability of dual-factor mental health in adolescence. Journal of School Psychology, 73, 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.03.003
96.
MorganG. B.HodgeK. J.BaggettA. R. (2016). Latent profile analysis with nonnormal mixtures: A Monte Carlo examination of model selection using fit indices. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 93, 146–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2015.02.019
97.
MuthénB.MuthénL. K. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 24(6), 882–891. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2000.tb02070.x
NylundK. L.AsparouhovT.MuthénB. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(4), 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396
100.
Nylund-GibsonK.ChoiA. Y. (2018). Ten frequently asked questions about latent class analysis. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 4(4), 440–461. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000176
101.
Nylund-GibsonK.GarberA. C.SinghJ.WitkowM. R.NishinaA.BellmoreA. (2022). The utility of latent class analysis to understand heterogeneity in youth coping strategies: A methodological introduction. Behavioral Disorders48(2), 106–120. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01987429211067214
102.
Nylund-GibsonK.GrimmR.QuirkM.FurlongM. (2014). A latent transition mixture model using the three-step specification. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 439–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915375
ÖzdemirN. (2019). Principal leadership and students’ achievement: Mediated pathways of professional community and teachers’ instructional practices. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 16(1), 81–104.
108.
PariseL. M.SpillaneJ. P. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers’ practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1086/648981
109.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553
110.
PrintyS.LiuY. (2021). Distributed leadership globally: The interactive nature of principal and teacher leadership in 32 countries. Educational Administration Quarterly, 57(2), 290–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X20926548
111.
RjoskC.RichterD.HochweberJ.LüdtkeO.KliemeE.StanatP. (2014). Socioeconomic and language minority classroom composition and individual reading achievement: The mediating role of instructional quality. Learning and Instruction, 32, 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.007
112.
RobinsonV. M.LloydC. A.RoweK. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509
113.
ŞahinİKesikF.BeycioğluK. (2017). Chaotic process in the assignment of school administrators and its effects. Elementary Education Online, 16(3), 1007–1021. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.330238
114.
SchererR.GustafssonJ. E. (2015). Student assessment of teaching as a source of information about aspects of teaching quality in multiple subject domains: An application of multilevel bifactor structural equation modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1550), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01550
115.
SebastianJ.AllensworthE. (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 626–663. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X11436273
116.
SeidelT.RimmeleR.PrenzelM. (2005). Clarity and coherence of lesson goals as a scaffold for student learning. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 539–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.08.004
117.
SpillaneJ. P.CamburnE. M.ParejaA. S. (2007). Taking a distributedperspective to the school principal’s workday. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 103–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760601091200
118.
SpillaneJ. P.HalversonR.DiamondJ. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X030003023
119.
SpillaneJ. P.HalversonR.DiamondJ. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed approach. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000106726
120.
SpillaneJ. P.HealeyK. (2010). Conceptualizing school leadership and management from a distributed perspective: An exploration of some study operations and measures. The Elementary School Journal, 111(2), 253–281. https://doi.org/10.1086/656300
121.
StollL.BolamR.McMahonA.WallaceM.ThomasS. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8
122.
SupovitzJ.SirinidesP.MayH. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670509353043
123.
ThiT. T.NguyenH. T. T. (2021). The effects of classroom management styles on students’ motivation and academic achievement in learning English. International Journal of Learning. Teaching and Educational Research, 20(1), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.1.12
124.
ThoonenE. E.SleegersP. J.OortF. J.PeetsmaT. T.GeijselF. P. (2011). How to improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496–536. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X11400185
UrickA.BowersA. J. (2014). What are the different types of principals across the United States? A latent class analysis of principal perception of leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(1), 96–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13489019
127.
UrickA. M. (2012). To what extent do typologies of school leaders across the US predict teacher attrition? A multilevel latent class analysis of principals and teachers [Doctoral Dissertation]. The University of Texas at San Antonio.
128.
UrickA. M. (2016). The influence of typologies of school leaders on teacher retention: A multilevel latent class analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 54(4), 434–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2014-0090
129.
Van HornM. L.FengY.KimM.LamontA.FeasterD.JakiT. (2016). Using multilevel regression mixture models to identify level-1 heterogeneity in level-2 effects. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23(2), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2015.1035437
130.
VeletićJ.OlsenR. V. (2021). Exploring school leadership profiles across the world: A cluster analysis approach to TALIS 2018. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–27. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2021.1953612
131.
WarwasJ.HelmC. (2018). Professional learning communities among vocational school teachers: Profiles and relations with instructional quality. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.012
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
