Trust effects between internal school actors (e.g., teachers, students, administrators, parents) are well established in the literature, but less evidence exists about trust in district administration, leading to the question addressed in this study: Does teacher trust in district administration operate in a similar way as other trust forms? The study begins by situating trust within district leadership literature. A definition of trust in district administration is then advanced and its nature explained. From here, evidence on trust effects and self-determination theory are used to advance a hypothesized model that is tested in the empirical analysis. Results support the theory that trust in district administration may function as a relational support for teachers.
AdamsC. M.ForsythP. B. (2013). Revisiting the collective trust effect in urban elementary schools. The Elementary School Journal, 113, 1–36.
2.
AdamsC. M.KhojastehJ. (2018). Igniting students’ inner determination: The role of a need-supportive climate. Journal of Educational Administration, 56, 382–397.
3.
AdamsC. M.MiskellR. C. (2016). Teacher trust in district administration: A promising line of inquiry. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52, 675–706.
4.
AdamsC. M.WareJ. K.MiskellR. C.ForsythP. B. (2016). Self-regulatory climate: A positive attribute of public schools. Journal of Educational Research, 109, 169–180.
5.
BachmannR. (2003). The role of trust and power in the institutional regulation of territorial business systems, cooperation, networks and institutions in regional innovation systems. North Hampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
6.
BermanP.McLaughlinM. W. (1977). Federal program supporting educational change, Vol. VII: Factors affecting implementation and continuation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
7.
BrykA. S.GomezL. M.GrunowA.LeMahieuP. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
8.
BrykA. S.SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
CarmeliA.GittellJ. H. (2009). High-quality relationships, psychological safety, and learning from failures in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 709–729.
10.
ChhuonV.GilkeyE. M.GonzalezM.DalyA. J.ChrispeelsJ. H. (2008). The little district that could: The process of building district-school trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 227–281.
11.
CoburnC. E.RussellJ. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social network. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 203–235.
12.
CohenA.DovehE.EickU. (2001). Statistical properties of rwg(j) index of agreement. Psychological Methods, 6, 297–310.
13.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120.
14.
CosnerS. (2009). Building organizational capacity through trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 248–291.
15.
DalyA. J.MoolenaarN. M.BolivarJ. M.BurkeP. (2010). Relationships in reform: The role of teachers’ social networks. Journal of Educational Administration, 48, 359–391.
16.
DasT. K.TengB. S. (1998). Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Academy of Management Review, 23, 491–512.
17.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49, 182–185.
18.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (2016). Optimizing students’ motivation in the era of testing and pressure: A self-determination theory perspective. In LiuW.WangJ.RyanR. M. (Eds.), Building autonomous learners (pp. 9–29). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
19.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M.GagneM.LeoneD. R.UsunovJ.KornazhevaB. P. (2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former eastern bloc country: A cross-cultural study of self-determination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 930–942.
20.
DiamondJ. B. (2012). Accountability policy, school organization, and classroom practice: Partial recoupling and educational opportunity. Education and Urban Society, 44, 151–182.
21.
DirksK. T.FerrinD. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611–628.
22.
FirestoneW. A. (2009). Culture and process in effective school districts. In HoyW. K.DiPaolaM. F. (Eds.). Studies in school improvement (pp. 177–204). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
23.
ForsythP. B.AdamsC. M.HoyW. K. (2011). Collective trust: Why schools can’t improve without it. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
24.
FukuyamaF. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York, NY: The Free Press.
25.
FullanM. (2010). All systems go: The change imperative for whole system reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
26.
FurrerC.SkinnerE. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148–162.
27.
HarrisA.ChrispeelsJ. H. (2009). Improving schools and educational systems: International perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge.
28.
HeaveyC.HallidayS. V.GilbertD.MurphyE. (2011). Enhancing performance: Bring trust, commitment and motivation together in organizations. Journal of General Management, 36, 1–18.
29.
HoffmanJ. D.SaboD.BlissJ.HoyW. K. (1994). Building a culture of trust. Journal of School Leadership, 4, 484–501.
30.
HonigM. I. (2006). Street-level bureaucracy revisited: Frontline district central-office administrators as boundary spanners in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28, 357–383.
31.
HonigM. I.HatchT. C. (2004). Crafting coherence: How schools strategically manage multiple, external demands. Educational Researcher, 33, 16–30.
32.
HoyW. K. (2002). Faculty trust: A key to student achievement. Journal of School Public Relations, 23, 88–103.
33.
HoyW. K.Tschannen-MoranM. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9, 184–208.
34.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
35.
KleinR. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling(3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
36.
KochanekJ. R. (2005). Building trust for better schools: Research-based practices. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
37.
LeeJ. C.ZhangZ.YinH. (2011). A multilevel analysis of the impact of a professional learning community, faculty trust in colleagues, and collective efficacy on teacher commitment to students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 820–830.
38.
LewickiR. J.BunkerB. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In KramerR. M.TylerT. R. (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 114–139). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
LiebermanM. D. (2013). Social: Why our brains are wired to connect. New York, NY: Broadway Books.
40.
LouisK. S. (2007). Trust and improvement in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 1–24.
41.
LustickD.SykesG. (2006), “National board certification as professional development: What are teachers learning?” Education Policy Analysis Achieves, 14, 1–44.
42.
McLaughlinM. W. (1990). The RAND change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19, 11–16.
43.
McLaughlinM. W.TalbertJ. (2003). Reforming districts: How districts support school reform: A research report, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, report 1.
44.
NiemiecC.RyanR. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 72, 133–144.
45.
NooteboomB. (2002). Trust: Forms, foundations, functions, failures, and figures. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
46.
ParkS.HenkinA. B.EgleyR. (2005). Teacher team commitment, teamwork, and trust: Exploring associations. Journal of Educational Administration, 43, 462–479.
47.
ParkS.OliverJ. S. (2008). National Board Certification as a catalyst for teachers’ learning about teaching: The effects of NPC process on candidate teachers’ PCK development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 812–834.
48.
ReeveJ. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In DeciE.RyanR. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 183–204). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
49.
ReeveJ.RyanR.DeciE. L.JangH. (2008). Understanding and promoting autonomous self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. In SchunkD. H.ZimmermanB. J. (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 223–244). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50.
RorrerA. K.SkrlaL.ScheurichJ. J. (2008). Districts as institutional actors in educational reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 307–357.
51.
RousseauD. M.BurtR. S.CamererC. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. The Academy of Management, 23, 393–404.
52.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
53.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In DeciE.RyanR. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination theory research (pp. 3–36). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
54.
SharrattL.FullanM. (2009). Realization: The change imperative for deepening district wide reform. San Francisco, CA: Corwin Press.
55.
SpillaneJ. P.ReiserB. J.GomezL. M. (2006). Policy implementation and cognition: The role of human, social, and distributed cognition in framing policy implementation. In HonigM. I. (Ed.), New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting complexity (pp. 47–66). Albany: State University of New York Press.
56.
SpillaneJ. P.ThompsonC. L. (1997). Reconstructing conceptions of local capacity: The local education agency’s capacity for ambitious instructional reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 185–203.
57.
SteinM. K.CoburnC. E. (2008). Architectures for learning: A comparative analysis of two urban school districts. American Journal of Education, 114, 583–626.
58.
ThauS.CrossleyC.BennettR. J.SczesnyS. (2007). The relationship between trust, attachment, and antisocial work behaviors. Human Relations, 60, 1155–1179.
59.
TrujilloT. (2013). The reincarnation of the effective schools research: Rethinking the literature on district effectiveness. Journal of Educational Administration, 51, 426–452.
60.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
61.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools: The role of leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 217–247.
62.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2014). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
63.
Tschannen-MoranM.HoyW. K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, and measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 70, 547–593.
64.
Tschannen-MoranM.Woolfolk HoyA. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experience teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 944–956.
65.
Van DyneA.PierceJ. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three filed studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 439–459.
66.
Van MaeleD.Van HoutteM. (2011). The quality of school life: Teacher-student trust relationships and the organizational school context. Social Indicators Research, 100, 85–100.
67.
Van MaeleD.Van HoutteM. (2012). The role of teacher and faculty trust in forming teachers’ job satisfaction: Do years of experience make a difference?Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 879–889.
68.
Van MaeleD.Van HoutteM.ForsythP. B. (2014). Introduction: Trust as a matter of equity and excellence in education. In Van MaeleD.ForsythP.Van HoutteN. (Eds.), Trust and school life: The role of trust in learning, teaching, leading, and bridging (pp. 1–33). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
69.
VansteenkisteM.RyanR. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 23, 263–280.
70.
WatersT. J.MarzanoR. J. (2006). School district leadership and works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. Denver, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.
71.
WengerE. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
72.
ZakP. J. (2017). Trust factor: The science of creating high-performing companies. New York, NY: American Management Association.
73.
ZandD. (1997). The leadership triad: Knowledge, trust, and power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
