Research from the past two decades positions relational trust as a key factor in school reform efforts. Trust between teachers and their principal (teacher-principal trust) and teachers and their colleagues (teacher-teacher trust) are particularly important. Leading Together (LT) is a new professional development and coaching model of the Center for Courage & Renewal designed to develop individual and collective capacity to build trust and enhance communication among adults in schools. In this article, we investigate the relation between successful implementation of LT and changes in trust in eight schools that participated in a pilot study of LT from 2012 to 2014. Results showed moderate increases in teacher-principal trust and teacher-teacher trust in schools implementing LT successfully. This article describes changes in trust and processes needed for the successful implementation of team-implemented programs, models, or approaches.
AdamsC. M. (2008). Building trust in schools: A review of the empirical evidence, In HoyW. K., & DiPaolaM. F. (Eds.), Improving schools: Studies in leadership and culture (pp. 29–54). United States: Information Age Publishing Inc.
2.
BerkelC., MauricioA M., SchoenfelderE., & SandlerI. N. (2011). Putting the pieces together An integrated model of program implementation.Prevention Science,12, 23–33. doi:10.1007/s11121-010-0186-1
3.
BrykA S., & SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement.New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
4.
BrykA S., SebringP. B., AllensworthE., LuppescuS., & EastonJ. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5.
CenturyJ., & CassataA. (2016). Implementation research: Finding common ground on what, how, why, where, and who.Review of Research in Education,40, 169–215.
6.
CohenJ. (1994). The earth is round p < .05).American Psychologist,49, 997–1003. doi: 10.1037/0003–066X.50.12.1103.
7.
ComerJ. P. (1993). All children can learn: A developmental approach.Holistic Education Review,6, 4–9.
8.
ComerJ. P., & EmmonsC. (2006). The research program of the Yale Child Study Center School Development Program.Journal of Negro Education,75, 353–372. Retrieved from http://wwwjstor.org/stable/40026808
9.
CongerA. J. (1980). Integration and generalization of kappas for multiple raters.Psychological Bulletin,88, 322. doi: 10.1037/0033–2909.88.2.322.
10.
Consortium on Chicago School Research. (1997). User's Manual, Version 1: Improving Chicago's schools, a survey of students and teachers in the Chicago Public Schools.Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved from http://consortium.uchicago.edu/downloads/876497manual.pdf
CranstonJ. (2011). Relational trust: The glue that binds a professional learning community.Alberta Journal of Educational Research,57, 59–72.
13.
DaneA. V., & SchneiderB. H. (1998). Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: are implementation effects out of control?Clinical Psychology Review,18, 23–45. doi: 10.1016/S0272-7358(97)00043-3.
14.
DobsonD., & CookT. J. (1980). Avoiding type III error in program evaluation: Results from a field experiment.Evaluation and Program Planning,3, 269–376. doi: 10.1016/0149-7189(80)90042-7.
15.
DuFourR. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?Educational Leadership,61, 6–11.
DurlakJ. A., & DuPreE. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation.American Journal of Community Psychology,41, 327–350. doi: 10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0.
18.
DusenburyL., BranniganR., FalcoM., & HansenW. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings.Health Education Research,18, 237–256. doi:10.1093/her/18.2.237.
19.
EliasM. J., ZinsJ. E., GraczykP. A., & WeissbergR. P. (2003). Implementation, sustainability, and scaling up of social-emotional and academic innovations in public schools.School Psychology Review,32, 303–319.
20.
ElliottD. S., & MihalicS. (2004). Issues in disseminating and replicating effective prevention programs.Prevention Science,5, 47–53. doi: 10.1023/B:P REV.0000013981.28071.52.
21.
ForsythP. B. (2008). The empirical consequences of school trust. In HoyW. K., & DiPaolaM. F. (Eds.), Improving schools: Studies in leadership and culture (pp. 1–27). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
22.
ForsythP. B., & AdamsC. M. (2014). Organizational predictability, the school principal, and achievement. In Van MaeleD., ForsythP. B., & Van HoutteM. (Eds.), Trust and school life (pp. 83–98). Netherlands: Springer.
23.
ForsythP. B., AdamsC. M., & HoyW. K. (2011). Collective trust: Why schools can't improve without it.New York City, NY: Teachers College.
24.
ForsythP. B., BarnesL. L., & AdamsC. M. (2006). TYust-effectiveness patterns in schools.Journal of Educational Administration,44, 122–141. doi: 10.1108/09578230610652024.
25.
GarmstonR., & WellmanB. (1995). Adaptive schools in a quantum universe.Educational Leadership,52, 6–12.
26.
GoddardY., GoddardR., & Tschannen-MoranM. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools.The Teachers College Record,109, 877–896.
27.
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.The Elementary School Journal,102, 3–17.
28.
GrissmerD. W., SubotnikR. F., & OrlandM. (2009). A guide to incorporating multiple methods in randomized controlled trials to assess intervention effects.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://gradpsych.apags.org/ed/schools/cpse/randomized-control-guide.pdf.
29.
HanS. S., & WeissB. (2005). Sustainability of teacher implementation of school-based mental health programs.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,33, 665–679. doi: 10.1007/s10802-005-7646–2.
30.
HillC. E., ThompsonB. J., & WilliamsE. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research.The Counseling Psychologist,25, 517–572. doi: 10.1177/0011000097254001.
31.
HoltM. K., RaczynskiK., FreyK. S., HymelS., & LimberS. P. (2013). School and community-based approaches for preventing bullying.Journal of School Violence,12, 238–252. doi: 10.1080/15388220.2013.792271.
32.
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: Information Age Publishing.
33.
HullemanC. S., Rimm-KaufmanS. E., & AbryT. (2013). Innovative methodologies to explore implementation: Whole-part-whole-construct validity, measurement, and analytical issues for intervention fidelity assessment in education research. In HalleT., MetzA., & Martinez-BeckI. (Eds.), Applying implementation science in early childhood programs and systems (pp. 65–93). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
JohnsonR. B., OnwuegbuzieA. J., & TurnerL. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research,1, 112–133. doi: 10.1177/1558689806298224.
36.
KenslerL. A. W., CaskieG. I. L., BarberM. E., & WhiteG. P. (2009). The ecology of democratic learning communities: Faculty trust and continuous learning in public middle schools.Journal of School Leadership,19, 697–735.
37.
KochanekJ. R. (2005). Building trust for better schools: Research based practices.Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
38.
LeisM., & Rimm-KaufmanS. E. (2015). Principal actions related to increases in teacher-principal trust.Journal of School Public Relations,36, 260–291.
39.
LeisM., SandilosL., & Rimm-KaufmanS. E. (2014). Implementation Process for Teams (IPT). Unpublished measure, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
40.
LouisK. S. (2007a). Trust and improvement in schools.Journal of Educational Change,8, 1–24. doi:10.1007/s10833-006-9015-5.
41.
LouisK. S. (2007b). Changing the culture of schools: Professional community, organizational learning, and trust.Journal of School Leadership,16, 477–487.
42.
MakiewiczM., & MitchellD. (2014). Teacher trust in the principal: Factor structure and effects. In Van MaeleD., ForsythP. B., & Van HoutteM. (Eds.), Trust and school life (pp. 99–120). Netherlands: Springer.
43.
MeierD. (2002). In schools we trust.Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
44.
MetzA., HalleT., BartleyL., & BlasbergA. (2013). The key components of successful implementation. In HalleT., MetzA., & Martinez-BeckI. (Eds.), Applying implementation science in early childhood programs and systems (pp. 21–42). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
45.
MoolenaarN. M., & SleegersP. J. C. (2010). Social networks, trust, ad innovation: The role of relationships in supporting an innovative climate in Dutch schools. In DaleyA. J. (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 97–114). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
46.
O'DonnellC. L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research.Review of Educational Research, 78, 33–84. doi: 10.3102/0034654307313793.
47.
Rimm-KaufmanS. E., LeisM., PaxtonC. (2014). Innovating together to improve the adult community in school: Results from a two-year study of the initial implementation of Leading Together.Seattle, WA: The Center for Courage & Renewal.
48.
SchneiderB., JudyJ., EbmeyeC. M., & BrodaM. (2014). Trust in elementary and secondary urban schools: A pathway for student success and college ambition. In Van MaeleD., ForsythP. B., & Van HoutteM. (Eds.), Trust and school life (pp. 37–56). Netherlands: Springer.
49.
SeigleP., WoodC., AckermanR., & SankowskiL. (2011). Building adult community in schools.Waterville Valley, NH: Courage to Lead Summer Institute.
50.
SmithP. A., HoyW. K., & SweetlandS. R. (2001). Organizational health of high schools and dimensions of faculty trust.Journal of School Leadership,12, 135–150.
51.
TarterC. J., SaboD., & HoyW. K. (1995). Middle school climate, faculty trust and effectiveness: A path analysis.Journal of Research and Development in Education,29, 41–49.
52.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust.Journal of Educational Administration,39, 308–331. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005493.
53.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism: The role of professional orientation and trust.Educational Administration Quarterly,45, 217–247. doi: 10.1177/0013161X08330501.
54.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2014a). The interconnectivity of trust in schools. In Van MaeleD., ForsythP. B., & Van HoutteM. (Eds.), Trust and school life (pp. 57–82). Netherlands: Springer.
Tschannen-MoranM., & BarrM. (2004). Fostering student learning: The relationship of collective teacher efficacy and student achievement.Leadership and Policy in Schools,3, 189–207. doi: 10.1080/15700760490503706.
57.
Tschannen-MoranM., & HoyW. K. (2000). A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Nature, Meaning, and Measurement of Trust.Review of Educational Research, Vol. 70, 547–593. doi: 10.3102/00346543070004547.
58.
UlineC., & Tschannen-MoranM. (2008). The walls speak: The interplay of quality facilities, school climate, and student achievement.Journal of Educational Administration,46, 55–73. doi: 10.1108/09578230810849817.
59.
WeissC. H. (1997). Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future.New Directions for Evaluation,76, 41–55. doi: 10.1002/ev.1086.
