The purpose of this study was to learn whether focusing on strengths through appreciative inquiry would be related to measurable changes in school climate and trust within a small urban school district. The district studied was a beleaguered, underperforming school district in the Midwest Rust Belt. Through an appreciative inquiry initiative, the district identified three areas of inquiry: student achievement and success, trust and respect, and community pride and involvement. The inquiries led to new initiatives in each area. A longitudinal study was conducted over 2 years, with data collected at two points, once 12 months before and again 12 months after the appreciative inquiry process was introduced. Significant improvements were shown in seven of the eight climate and trust variables assessed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsM. (2004). Change your questions, change your life: 7 powerful tools for life and work.San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
2.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York: Freeman.
3.
BennisW., & NanusB. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge.New York: Harper & Row.
4.
BormanW. C., & MotowidloS. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In SchmittN., & BormanW. C. (Eds.), Personality selection (pp. 71–98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
BrownT. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation.New York: HarperCollins.
6.
BusheG. R. (2007). AI is not (just) about the positive. Organization Development Practitioner, 39(4), 30–35.
7.
BusheG. R. (2008). AI at Metropolitan School District. In CooperriderD. L., WhitneyD., & StavrosJ. M., AI handbook (2nd ed., pp. 314–317) Brunswick, OH: Crown.
8.
CalabreseR., PattersonJ., LiuF., GoodvinS., HummelC., & NanceE. (2008). An AI into the Circle of Friends Program: The benefits of social inclusion of students with disabilities. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 4(2), 20–49.
9.
CalabreseR., San MartinT., GlasgowJ., & FriesenS. (2008). The power of an AI 4-D cycle in an non-AYP middle school: Positive direction for eight grade teachers. Journal of Research for Educational Leaders, 4(2), 17–42.
10.
CameronK. S., DuttonJ. E., & QuinnR. E. (Eds.). (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline.San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
11.
CooperriderD. L. (2000). Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of organizing. In CooperriderD. L., SorensenP. F.Jr., WhitneyD., & YaegerT. F. (Eds.), Appreciative inquiry: Rethinking human organization toward a positive theory of change (pp. 29–53). Champaign, IL: Stipes.
12.
CooperriderD. L., & SrivastvaS. (1987). AI in organizational life. In PasmoreW. A., & WoodmanR. W. (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 1, pp. 129–169). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
13.
CooperriderD. L., & SrivastvaS. (1999). AI in organizational life. In CooperriderD. L., & SrivastvaS. (Eds.), Appreciative management and leadership (pp. 401–441). Euclid, OH: Lakeshore Communications.
14.
CooperriderD. L., WhitneyD., & StavrosJ. M. (2008). AI handbook for leaders of change (2nd ed.). Brunswick, OH: Crown.
15.
CosnerS. (2009). Building organizational capacity through trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 248–291.
16.
DalyA. J., & ChrispeelsJ. (2005). From problem to possibility: Leadership for implementing and deepening the processes of effective schools. Journal for Effective Schools, 4, 7–25.
17.
DiPaolaM., & Tschannen-MoranM. (2001). Organizational citizenship behavior in schools and its relationship to school climate. Journal of School Leadership, 11, 424–447.
18.
FredricksonB. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions. American Scientist, 91, 330–335.
19.
FredricksonB. L. (2009). Positivity: Groundbreaking research reveals how to embrace the hidden strength of positive emotions, overcome negativity, and thrive.New York: Crown.
20.
GoddardR. D., Tschannen-MoranM., & HoyW. K. (2001). A multilevel examination of the distribution and effects of teacher trust in students and parents in urban elementary schools. Elementary School Journal, 102(1), 3–17.
21.
HallingerP., & HeckR. I. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32, 5–44.
22.
HaugerB., & HalvorsenF. O. (2007, February). AI as a strategy to develop Ringshaug primary school into an extraordinary learning organisation. AI Practitioner, pp. 25–31.
23.
HoyW., HannumJ., & Tschannen-MoranM. (1998). Organizational climate and student achievement: A parsimonious view and longitudinal view. Journal of School Leadership, 8, 336–359.
24.
HoyW. K., & Tschannen-MoranM. (2003). The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trust in schools: The omnibus T-Scale. In HoyW. K., & MiskelC. G. (Eds.), Studies in leading and organizing schools (pp. 181–208). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
25.
KatzD., & KahnR. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
26.
KelleyT. (2001). The art of innovation: Lessons in creativity from IDEO, America's leading design firm.New York: Doubleday.
27.
LangerE. J. (2009). Counterclockwise: Mindful health and the power of possibility.New York: Ballantine.
28.
LudemaJ. D., WhitneyD., MohrB. J., & GriffinT. J. (2003). The AI summit: A practitioner's guide for leading large-group change.San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
29.
Luth-HanssenV., & HaavimbA. E. (2007, February). Preparing for AI in a school development project by using solution focused dialogues. AI Practitioner, pp. 19–24.
30.
Luth-HanssenV., HaugerB., & NesjeR. (2007, February). What impact does AI have on schools?AI Practitioner, pp. 37–43.
31.
NesjeR. (2007, February). Bright eyes give energy! The impact of AI in schools over time. AI Practitioner, pp. 1–4.
32.
NesjeR., & NesjeP. (2007, February). Experimental learning through improved participation: How to best ensure real student participation and more flexible learning in the education system?AI Practitioner, pp. 11–18.
33.
OrganD. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97.
34.
PrattC. S. (2003, February). Positive education and change in Cleveland, AI Practitioner, pp. 18–19.
35.
PriceN., ScullyD., & WilloughbyG. (2007, February). Sustaining positive change in a school setting through an evolving model of AI. AI Practitioner, pp. 44–48.
36.
RosenbergM. S. (2005). Nonviolent communication: A language of life.Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.
37.
RosenbergM. S. (2006). The nonviolent communication training course: home study course.Louisville, CO: Sound True.
38.
ScharmerC. O. (2007). Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges.Cambridge, MA: Society for Organizational Learning.
39.
SmithC. A., OrganD. W., & NearJ. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653–663.
40.
StewartR. (1985). The reality of management.London: Heinemann.
41.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2004a). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
42.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2004b, November). What's trust got to do with it? The role of faculty and principal trust in fostering student achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration, Kansas City, MO.
43.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism: The role of professional orientation and trust, Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 217–247.
44.
Tschannen-MoranM., ParishJ., & DiPaolaM. F. (2006). School climate: The interplay between interpersonal relationships and student achievement. Journal of School Leadership, 16, 386–415.
45.
Tschannen-MoranB., & Tschannen-MoranM. (2010). Evocative coaching: Transforming schools one conversation at a time.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
46.
WatkinsJ. M., & MohrB. J. (2001). Appreciative inquiry: Change at the speed of imagination.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
47.
WigestrandS., & HaugerB. (2007, February). The memory-hunting project: Moving from bullying tendencies to joyful moments in one primary school class. AI Practitioner, pp. 32–36.
WilloughbyG., & ToseyP. (2007). Imagine Meadfield: AI as a process for leading school improvement. Educational Management, Administration, & Leadership, 35, 499–520.
50.
ZanderR. S., & ZanderB. (2000). The art of possibility.New York: Penguin Books.
