This study outlines the relationship between teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of their influence over policies within their school and teachers’ actual employment decisions—specifically, teachers’ decisions to stay (continue their affiliation with their school), to move (transfer to a different school), or to leave the teaching profession. This article outlines a theoretical orientation that brings the exercise of influence within an organization together with three theories of school leadership to focus on the extent to which teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of their exercise of influence over school policy affects teachers’ turnover decisions. Using data from the 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey in a series of multinomial logistic regressions, the analysis finds that increases in teacher influence over school policy are associated with greater teacher job stability (stayers), whereas increases in principal influence over school policy are associated with a higher incidence of teachers leaving the teaching profession (leavers). This study highlights the important role that principals’ perceptions of their own influence over school policy play in teachers’ employment decisions and, therefore, the employment stability of teachers in their schools.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AluttoJ. A., & BelascoJ. A. (1972). A typology for participation in organizational decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 117–125.
2.
AluttoJ. A., & BelascoJ. A. (1973). Patterns of teacher participation in school system decision making. Educational Administration Quarterly, 9, 27–41.
3.
AndersonK. D. (2004). The nature of teacher leadership in schools as reciprocal influences between teacher leaders and principals. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(1), 97–113.
4.
BarnesG., CroweE., & SchaeferB. (2007). The cost of teacher turnover in five school districts: A pilot study.Washington, DC: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
5.
BeadiN. (1996). From “teacher as decision maker” to teacher as participant in “shared decision making”: Reframing the purpose of social foundations in teacher education. Teachers College Record, 98(1), 77–97.
6.
BelascoJ. A., & AluttoJ. A. (1972). Decisional participation and teacher satisfaction. Educational Administration Quarterly, 8(1), 44–58.
7.
BillingsleyB. S., & CrossL. H. (1992). Predictors of commitment, job satisfaction, and intent to stay in teaching: A comparison of general and special educators. Journal of Special Education, 25(4), 453–471.
BlaseJ., & BlaseJ. (1999). Implementation of shared governance for instructional improvement: Principals’ perspectives. Journal of Educational Administration, 37(5), 476–500.
10.
BormanG. D., & DowlingN. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409.
11.
BoydD., LankfordH., LoebS., & WyckoffJ. (2005). The draw of home: How teachers’ preferences for proximity disadvantage urban schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(1), 113–132.
12.
ConleyS. (1991). Review of research on teacher participation in school decision making. Review of Research in Education, 17, 225–266.
13.
ConleyS., SchmidleT., & SheddJ. B. (1988). Teacher participation in the management of school systems. Teachers College Record, 90(2), 259–280.
14.
DukeD., ShowersB., & ImberM. (1981). Studying shared decision making in schools. In BacharachS. B. (Ed.), Organizational behavior in schools and school districts (pp. 245–276). New York: Praeger.
15.
FergusonC. J. (2009). An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(5), 532–538.
16.
FrostD., & HarrisA. (2003). Teacher leadership: Towards a research agenda. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 479–498.
17.
GardnerJ. W. (1990). On leadership.New York: Free Press.
18.
GearyL. S. (1992). The policymaking process resulting in fiscal policy for special education in the state of Utah. Unpublished dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
19.
GoldsteinJ. (2004). Making sense of distributed leadership: The case of peer assistance and review. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(2), 173.
20.
GoodladJ. (2004). A place called school (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
21.
HanushekE. A., KainJ. F., & RivkinS. G. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.
22.
HanushekE. A., & RivkinS. G. (2007). Pay, working conditions, and teacher quality. Future of Children, 17(1), 69–86.
23.
HarrisA., LeithwoodK., DayC., SammonsP., & HopkinsD. (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 337–347.
24.
HatchT., WhiteM. E., & FaigenbaumD. (2005). Expertise, credibility, and influence: How teachers can influence policy, advance research, and improve performance. Teachers College Record, 107(5), 1004–1035.
25.
HowardT. C. (2004). Who receives the short end of the shortage? Implications of the U.S. teacher shortage on urban schools. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(2), 142–160.
26.
ImberM., & DukeD. L. (1984). Teacher participation in school decision making: A framework for research. Journal of Educational Administration, 22(1), 24–34.
27.
IngersollR. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.
28.
IngersollR. M. (2003). Who controls teachers’ work: Power and accountability in America's schools.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
IngersollR. M., AlsalamN., QuinnP., & BobbittS. (1997). Teacher professionalization and teacher commitment: A multilevel analysis.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
30.
KirbyS., BerendsM., & NaftelS. (1999). Supply and demand of minority teachers in Texas: Problems and prospects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(1), 47–66.
31.
Laczko-KerrI., & BerlinerD. C. (2002). The effectiveness of “Teach for America” and other under-certified teachers on student academic achievement: A case of harmful public policy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(37). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/316
32.
LankfordH., LoebS., & WyckoffJ. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37–62.
33.
LouisK. S., MayrowetzD., SmileyM., & MurphyJ. (2009). The role of sensemaking and trust in developing distributed leadership. In HarrisA. (Ed.), Distributed leadership: Studies in educational leadership (Vol. 7, pp. 157–180). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
34.
LuekensM. T., LyterD. M., & FoxE. E. (2004). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the Teacher Follow-up Survey, 2000-2001.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
35.
MalenB. (1995). The micropolitics of education: Mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school polities. In SchribnerJ. D., & LaytonD. H. (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 147–168). Washington, DC: Falmer.
36.
MalenB., & OgawaR. T. (1988). Professional–patron influence on site-based governance councils: A confounding case study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(4), 251–270.
37.
MalenB., & RiceJ. K. (2009). School reconstitution and school improvement. In SykesG., SchneiderB., & PlankD. N. (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 464–477). New York: Routledge.
38.
MayrowetzD. (2008). Making sense of distributed leadership: Exploring the multiple usages of the concept in the field. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(3), 424–435.
39.
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.
40.
Moore JohnsonS., DonaldsonM., KirkpatrickC., MarinellW., SteeleJ., & SzczesiulS. (2008). Angling for access, bartering for change: How second-stage teachers experience differentiated roles in schools. Teachers College Record, 110(5), 1088–1114.
41.
MurphyP., DeArmondM., & GuinK. (2003). A national crisis or localized problem? Getting perspective on the scope and scale of the teacher shortage. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(23). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n23/
42.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2004). 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) data file user's manual (Pub. No. NCES 2004-303). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
43.
NeildR., UseemE., TraversF., & LesnickJ. (2003). Once and for all: Placing a highly qualified teacher in every Philadelphia classroom.Philadelphia: Research for Action.
44.
OgawaR. T., & BossertS. T. (1995). Leadership as an organizational quality. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(2), 224–243.
45.
ParsonsT. (1963). On the concept of influence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 27(1), 37–62.
46.
ReesD. (1991). Grievance procedure strength and teacher quits. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 45, 31–43.
47.
RivkinS. G., HanushekE. A., & KainJ. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.
48.
RockoffJ. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.
49.
RowanB. (1990). Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools. Review of Research in Education, 16, 353–389.
50.
ShockleyR., GuglielminoP., & WattingtonE. (2006, January). The costs of teacher attrition. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
51.
SmithT. M., & IngersollR. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover?American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681–714.
52.
SmylieM. A. (1994). Redesigning teachers’ work: Connections to the classroom. Review of Research in Education, 20, 129–177.
53.
SmylieM. A., & Brownlee-ConyersJ. (1992). Teacher leaders and their principals: Exploring the development of new working relationships. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(2), 150–184.
54.
SmylieM. A., ConleyS., & MarksH. M. (2002). Building leadership into the roles of teachers. In MurphyJ. F. (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp. 162–188). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
55.
SmylieM. A., & DennyJ. W. (1990). Teacher leadership: Tensions and ambiguities in organizational perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26(3), 235–259.
56.
SmylieM. A., LazarusV., & Brownlee-ConyersJ. (1996). Instructional outcomes of school-based participative decision making. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(3), 181–198.
57.
SpillaneJ. P., & CamburnE. (2006, April). The practice of leading and managing: The distribution of responsibility for leadership and management in the schoolhouse. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
58.
SpillaneJ. P., HalversonR., & DiamondJ. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–28.
59.
SpillaneJ. P., HalversonR., & DiamondJ. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34.
60.
SpillaneJ. P., & DiamondJ. B. (Eds.). (2007). Distributed leadership in practice.New York: Teachers College Press.
61.
StinebricknerT. R. (2001). A dynamic model of teacher labor supply. Journal of Labor Economics, 19(1), 196–230.
62.
StrizekG., PittsonbergerJ., RiordanK., LyterD., & OrlofskyG. (2006). Characteristics of schools, districts, teachers, principals, and school libraries in the United States 2003-04 Schools and Staffing Survey (Pub. No. NCES 2006-313, revised). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
63.
Texas Center for Educational Research. (2000). The cost of teacher turnover.Austin, TX: Author.
64.
TimmerD. (2003). Where have all the teachers gone? The costs of teacher turnover in ACORN neighborhood schools in Chicago.Chicago: ACORN.
65.
WeissC. H., & CamboneJ. (2000). Principals, shared decision making and school reform. In FullanM. (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (pp. 366–389). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
