Teacher leadership is framed as participatory governance, yet teacher leaders (TLs) may remain implementers rather than authorized co-deciders. This qualitative study examines TLs’ participation in school-level policy making through three governance dimensions: access, influence, and boundary crossing. Findings from semi-structured interviews with 20 classroom TLs suggest that access is managed through selective invitation, service-based entry, and informal corridor decision circuits, shaping where TLs can exert influence. Consequently, influence concentrates in low-stakes pedagogical domains and is often diluted or reversed during formal approval as issues become more sensitive and consequential. Under such conditions, boundary regulation tightens, producing performative participation and self-silencing.
Abdel-MoneimMA (2015) A Political Economy of Arab Education: Policies and Comparative Perspectives. 1st ed.New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315743493
2.
AkkermanSBruiningT (2016) Multilevel boundary crossing in a professional development school partnership. Journal of the Learning Sciences25(2): 240–284.
3.
AkkermanSFBakkerA (2011) Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research81(2): 132–169.
4.
Al-FadalaAPaquin MorelRSpillaneJP (2021) Multilevel Distributed Leadership: From why to how. In: NetolickyDM (eds) Future Alternatives for Educational Leadership: Diversity, Inclusion, Equity and Democracy. Routledge, 79–92. 10.4324/9781003131496-9
5.
ArnsteinSR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners35(4): 216–224. 10.1080/01944366908977225
6.
BallSJ (2016) Following policy: Networks, network ethnography and education policy mobilities. Journal of Education Policy31(5): 549–566.
7.
BallSJMaguireMBraunA (2012) How Schools do Policy: Policy Enactments in Secondary Schools. London, England: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203153185
8.
BiestaGPriestleyMRobinsonS (2015) The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice21(6): 624–640.
9.
BlaseJ(ed) (1991) The Politics of Life in Schools: Power, Conflict, and Cooperation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
BlaseJAndersonG (1995) The Micropolitics of Educational Leadership: From Control to Empowerment. 1234 Amsterdam Ave., New York, NY 10027: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
11.
BraunAMaguireMBallSJ (2010) Policy enactments in the UK secondary school: Examining policy, practice and school positioning. Journal of Education Policy25(4): 547–560.
12.
BraunVClarkeV (2022) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London, England: Sage.
13.
BuchananRMillsTEdwardB, et al. (2023) Teacher leadership collaborative: Boundary-crossing spaces for teacher empowerment. Professional Development in Education49(6): 1152–1166.
14.
ChoiTHWongYL (2024) Does public consultation affect policy formulation? Negotiation strategies between the administration and citizens. Journal of Education Policy39(3): 455–479.
15.
ConstantinidesM (2025) Leadership at the boundaries of schools: Navigating the complexities of collaboration. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Advance online publication. 10.1177/17411432251343995
16.
DatnowA (2020) The role of teachers in educational reform: A 20-year perspective. Journal of Educational Change21(3): 431–441.
17.
DhakalK (2022) NVivo. Journal of the Medical Library Association110(2): 270–272.
18.
Edwards-JonesA (2014) Qualitative data analysis with NVIVO. Journal of Education for Teaching40(2): 193–195.
19.
FlessaJ (2009) Educational micropolitics and distributed leadership. Peabody Journal of Education84(3): 331–349.
20.
FlickU (2018) An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
21.
GhamrawiN (2016) A Policy Review of School Leadership in the Arab States. In UNESCO (ed) Leading Better Learning: School Leadership and Quality in the Education 2030 Agenda: Regional Reviews of Policies and Practices. Paris, France: UNESCO, pp. 26–49.
22.
GhamrawiN (2025) Unpacking policy barriers to effective school leadership in the Arab region. Management in Education. Advance online publication. 10.1177/08920206251384067
23.
GhamrawiNAbu-ShawishRKShalT, et al. (2024b) Teacher leadership in higher education: why not?Cogent Education11(1). 10.1080/2331186X.2024.2366679.
24.
GhamrawiNShalTGhamrawiNAR (2023) Stepping into middle leadership: A hermeneutic phenomenological study. International Journal of Leadership in Education: 1–21. 10.1080/13603124.2023.2248060.
25.
GhamrawiNShalTGhamrawiNAR (2024a) Leadership development in virtual communities of practice: The case of school principals from the GCC region. Education and Information Technologies29: 23897–23916.
26.
GhamrawiNShalTGhamrawiNAR (2024c) School Leadership 4.0: Are we Ready? In: PapadakisS (eds) IoT, AI, and ICT for Educational Applications. Springer, 187–209. 10.1007/978-3-031-50139-5_9
27.
GhamrawiNShalTGhamrawiNAR (2025a) Teacher leadership in the Arab states: A systematic review. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Advance online publication. 10.1177/17411432251406019.
28.
GhamrawiNShalTGhamrawiNAR (2025b) Teacher leadership through an Arab lens: A contextual and culturally grounded reconceptualisation. School Leadership & Management45: 1–26.
29.
GhamrawiNShalTGhamrawiNAR (2025c) Department heads’ professional agency: Investigating self-perceptions and deans’ perspectives through vignette-based analysis. Studies in Higher Education50(9): 1918–1936.
30.
GhamrawiNAR (2018) Schooling for digital citizens. Open Journal of Leadership7: 209–224.
31.
GiudiciA (2021) Teacher politics bottom-up: Theorising the impact of micro-politics on policy generation. Journal of Education Policy36(6): 761–780.
32.
GürbüzOÖzdemirT (2025) The relationship between school organizational structure and tokenism perception: A study based on teachers’ views. ÜNİVERSİTEPARK Bülten14(1): 74–92.
33.
HallMHampden-ThompsonG (2022) The teacher as street-level bureaucrat: Science teacher’s discretionary decision-making in a time of reform. International Journal of Science Education44(6): 980–999.
34.
HanbergerA (2016) Evaluation in local school governance: A framework for analysis. Education Inquiry7(3): 29914.
35.
HarrisAJonesM (2019) Teacher leadership and educational change. School Leadership & Management39(2): 123–126.
36.
HarrisAJonesMIsmailN (2022) Distributed leadership: Taking a retrospective and contemporary view of the evidence base. School Leadership andamp; Management42(5): 438–456. 10.1080/13632434.2022.2109620
InnesM (2021) The micro-politics of policy enactment in a multi-academy trust. School Leadership & Management41(5): 460–476.
39.
JonesC (2020) Qualitative Interviewing. In: Handbook for Research Students in the Social Sciences. Routledge, 203–214.
40.
LinaoRSGosadanBD (2019) Meeting our commitment: School-based management system in the lens of school performance. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research38(1): 196–212.
41.
MortelmansD (2025) Doing Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo. Springer. 10.1007/978-3-031-66014-6
42.
NguyenTDSpringerMG (2023) A conceptual framework of teacher turnover: A systematic review of the empirical international literature and insights from the employee turnover literature. Educational Review75(5): 993–1028.
43.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2019) OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030: OECD Learning Compass 2030. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
44.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2023) OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023: Towards an Effective Digital Education Ecosystem. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. 10.1787/c74f03de-en
45.
RobinsonVMJTimperleyHS (2013) School Improvement Through Theory Engagement. In: LaiMKushnerS (eds) A Developmental and Negotiated Approach to School Self-Evaluation (Advances in Program Evaluation. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 14, 163–177. 10.1108/S1474-7863(2013)0000014010
46.
SewellA (2022) Introduction: Voice, Power, and Action in Schools. In: SewellA (eds) Diverse Voices in Educational Practice: A Workbook for Promoting Pupil, Parent and Professional Voice. London, England: Routledge, 1–18. 10.4324/9781003165842-1
47.
ShalTGhamrawiNGhamrawiN (2019) Mobile learning for differentiated school leadership development. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology1(2): 88–103.
48.
ShalTGhamrawiNGhamrawiNAR (2024) Does Accreditation Lead to School Improvement? Perceptions of Educators in K-12 Settings. Sage Open14(3). 10.1177/21582440241281222.
49.
ShiehE (2023) How teachers see policy: School context, teacher inquiry, and policy visibility. Journal of Education Policy38(1): 166–188.
SmylieMA (1992) Teacher participation in school decision making: Assessing willingness to participate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis14(1): 53–67.
52.
SpillaneJP (2006) Distributed Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
53.
SpillaneJPMorelRPAl-FadalaA (2019) Educational Leadership: A Multilevel Distributed Perspective. WISE Research Series. Doha: World Innovation Summit for Education.
54.
UNESCO (2024) Global Education Monitoring Report 2024/5: Leadership in Education: Lead for Learning. Paris, France: UNESCO. 10.54676/MGBQ7259
55.
WennerJACampbellT (2017) The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research87(1): 134–171.
56.
WohlstetterPSmyerRMohrmanSA (1994) New boundaries for school-based management: The high involvement model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis16(3): 268–286.
57.
York BarrJDukeK (2004) What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research74(3): 255–316. 10.3102/00346543074003255
