Transformational leadership by the principal appears to be a precondition of shared instructional leadership in schools, but it does not guarantee that principals and teachers will collaborate on curriculum and instruction. The present study, a content analysis of existing case studies, explores the ways in which teachers respond to transformational leadership by the principal, with attention paid to the influence and conditions that activate interdependent relationships and enhance shared transformational leadership and shared instructional leadership. A contrast school, where shared instructional leadership did not take hold, suggests that structures and processes that organize teachers’ work differently do not automatically result in the kinds of interactions associated with quality teaching and learning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnfaraV. A., BrownK. M., & MangioneT. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 28–38.
2.
AvolioB. J., SivasubraminiamN., MurryW. D., JungD., & GargerJ. W. (2003). Assessing shared leadership: Development and preliminary validation of a team multifactor leadership questionnaire. In PearceC. L., & CongerJ. A. (Eds.), Shared leadership: Refraining the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 143–172). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
BassB. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations.New York: Free Press.
4.
BassB. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industrial, military, and educational impact.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
BerendsM., & KingM. B. (1994). A description of restructuring in nationally nominated schools: Legacy of the iron cage?Educational Policy, 8(1), 28–50.
6.
BlockP. (1987). The empowered manager: Positive political skills at work.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
BurnsJ. M. (1978). Leadership.New York: Harper & Row.
8.
ChrispeelsJ. H. (Ed.). (2004). Learning to lead together: The promise and challenge of sharing leadership.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
ConleyD. T., & GoldmanP. (1994). Ten propositions for facilitative leadership. In MurphyJ., & LouisK. S. (Eds.), Reshaping the principalship: Insights from transformational reform efforts (pp. 237–262). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
10.
CrowtherF., KaaganS., FergusonM., & HannL. (2002). Developing teacher leaders: How teacher leadership enhances school success.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
11.
CubanL. (1984). Transforming the frog into a prince: Effective schools research, policy, and practice at the district level. Harvard Educational Review, 54(2), 129–151.
12.
FirestoneW. A. (1996). Leadership: Roles or functions? In LeithwoodK., ChapmanJ., CorsonP., HallingerP., & HartA. (Eds.), International handbook of education leadership and administration (pp. 395–418). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
13.
GlanzJ., & NevilleR. F. (1997). Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues and controversies.Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
14.
GlickmanC. (1989). Has Sam and Samantha's time come at last?Educational Leadership, 46(8), 4–9.
15.
GronnP. (2002). Distributed leadership. In LeithwoodK., & HallingerP. (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 653–696). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
16.
GullyS. M., JoshiA., & IncalcaterraK. A. (2001, April). A meta-analytic investigation of the relationships among team efficacy, self-efficacy, and performance. Paper presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference, San Diego, CA.
17.
HallingerP. (1992). The evolving role of American principals: From managerial to instructional to transformational leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 30(3), 35–49.
18.
HalhngerP. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 221–239.
19.
LambertL. (2006). Lasting leadership: A study of high leadership capacity schools. Educational Forum, 70(3), 238–254.
20.
LeithwoodK. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(4), 498–518.
21.
LeithwoodK., & JantziD. (1999a). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(2), 112–129.
22.
LeithwoodK., & JantziD. (1999b). Transformational school leadership effects: A replication. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(4), 451–479.
23.
LeithwoodK., & JantziD. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership research, 1996–2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 177–199.
24.
LeithwoodK., & JantziD. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(2), 201–227.
25.
LeithwoodK., & MascallB. (2008). The collective effects of leadership on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529–561.
26.
LeithwoodK., TomlinsonD., & GengeM. (1996). Transformational school leadership. In LeithwoodK., ChapmanJ., CorsonP., HallingerP., & HartA. (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 785–840). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
27.
LincolnY. (2001). Varieties of validity: Quality in qualitative research. In SmartJ., & TierneyW. (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 25–72). New York: Agathon Press.
28.
LittleJ. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129–151.
29.
MalenB., OgawaR. T., & KranzJ. (1990). What do we know about school based management? A case study of the literature—A call for research. In CluneW. H. (Ed.), Choice and control in American education: Vol. 2. The practice of choice, decentralization, and school restructuring (pp. 289–342). London: Falmer.
30.
ManginM. M., & StoelingaS. R. (2008). Effective teacher leadership: Using research to inform and reform.New York: Teachers College Press.
31.
MarksH. M., & LouisK. S. (1997). Does teacher empowerment affect the classroom? The implications of teacher empowerment for instructional practice and student academic performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 245–275.
32.
MarksH. M., & PrintyS. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: Integrating transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370–397.
33.
MurphyJ., & HallingerR. (1987). New directions in the professional development of school administrators: A synthesis and suggestions for improvement. In MurphyJ., & HalhngerP. (Eds.), Approaches to administrative training in education (pp. 245–282). Albany: State University of New York Press.
34.
NewmannF. M. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
35.
RosenholtzS. J. (1985). Effective schools: Interpreting the evidence. American Journal of Education, 93(3), 352–387.
36.
SergiovanniT. (1991). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
37.
SmylieM. A., & DennyJ. W. (1990). Teacher leadership: Tensions and ambiguities in organizational perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26, 235–259.
SykesG. (1990). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools. In ElmoreR. F. (Ed.), Restructuring schools: The next generation of school reform (pp. 59–96). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
40.
Van MaanenJ. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41.
WengerE. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.New York: Cambridge University Press.
42.
York-BarrJ., & DukeK. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255–316.
