Are your students safe to learn? The role of lecturer’s authentic leadership in the creation of psychologically safe environments and their impact on academic performance
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2020
Are your students safe to learn? The role of lecturer’s authentic leadership in the creation of psychologically safe environments and their impact on academic performance
As the role of students and lecturers in higher education changes, several questions emerge about the role of each of them on students’ academic performance. This includes questions regarding the impact of the relationships between students, lecturer’s characteristics and the social environment on students’ performance. To address these questions, this article reports a study of the impact of lecturer authentic leadership, psychological safety and network density on academic performance. It explores the relationship between network density, psychological safety and lecturer authentic leadership. A questionnaire was distributed to undergraduate students. A positive impact of lecturer authentic leadership and psychological safety on academic performance was found. Students from high-density groups tended to show better academic performance, higher psychological safety and tended to see their lecturers as being more authentic. A reflection on the role of the lecturer in higher education settings is presented. It also presents some recommendations on how student academic performance can be improved by the adoption of specific behaviours by their lecturer.
BanduraA (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Worth Publishers.
2.
BhindiNDuignanP (1997) Leadership for a new century: Authenticity, intentionality, spirituality, and sensibility. Educational Management Administration & Leadership25(2): 117–32.
3.
BorgattiSHalginD (2011) On network theory. Organization Science22(5): 1–14.
4.
BorgattiSPEverettMGFreemanLC (2002) UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
5.
BorgattiSPEverettMGJohnsonJC (2013) Analyzing Social Networks. London: SAGE.
6.
CarmeliA (2007) Social capital, psychological safety and learning behaviours from failure in organisations. Long Range Planning40(1): 30–44.
7.
CarmeliAGittellJH (2009) High-quality relationships, psychological safety, and learning from failures in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior30(6): 709–29.
8.
CavanaughM (2011) Students’ experiences of active engagement though cooperative learning activities in lectures. Active Learning in Higher Education12(1): 23–33.
9.
ChooALindermanKSchroederRG (2007) Social and method effects on learning behaviors and knowledge creation in six sigma projects. Management Science53(3): 437–50.
10.
EdmondsonA (2003) Managing the risk of learning: Psychological safety in work teams. In: WestMTjosvoldDSmithK (eds) International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Work. London: Wiley, pp. 255–75.
11.
EdmondsonAC (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly44(2): 350–83.
12.
EdmonsonACZhikeL (2014) Psychological safety: The history, renaissance and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psycholoy and Organizational Behaviour1(1): 23–43.
13.
GardnerWLCogliserCCDavisKM, et al. (2011) Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly22(6): 1120–45.
14.
HarterS (2002) Authenticity. In: SnyderCRLopezS (eds) Handbook of Positive Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 382–94.
HuangCCChuCYJiangPC (2008) An empirical study of psychological safety and performance in technology and R&D teams. In: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Techcnoloy, Bangkok, Thailand, 21-24 September 2008, pp. 1423–1427
17.
HinojosaASMcCauleyKDRandolph-SengB, et al. (2014) Leader and follower attachment styles: Implications for authentic leader-follower relationships. Leadership Quarterly25(3): 595–610.
KahnWA (1990) Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal33(4): 692–724.
20.
KernisMH (2003) Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry14(1): 1–26.
21.
KernisMHGoldmanBM (2005) From thought and experience to behavior and interpersonal relationships: A multi component conceptualization of authenticity. In: TesserAWoodJVStapelDA (eds.) On building, defending and regulating the self: A psychological perspective. New York: Psychology Press, pp.31—52.
22.
LusherDRobinsGKremerP (2010) The application of social network analysis to team sports. Measurement in Physi Education and Exercise Science14(4): 211–24.
23.
LuthansFAvolioBJ (2003) Authentic leadership: A positive developmental approach. In: CameronKSDuttonJEQuinnRE (eds) Positive Organizational Scholarship. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler, pp. 241–61.
24.
McPhersonJMPopielarzMDrobnicS (1992) Social networks and organizational dynamics. American Sociological Review57(2): 153–70.
25.
MazutisDSlawinskiN (2007) The art of conversation: How authentic leaders influence organizational learning. In: International conference on organization learning, knowledge and capabilities, London, ON, Canada, 14–17 June, pp. 662–75.
26.
OrtegaAVan de BosschePSánchez-ManzanaresM, et al. (2014) The influence of change-oriented leadership and psychological safety on team learning in healthcare teams. Journal of Business Psychology29(2): 311–32.
27.
ReagansRMcEvilyB (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly48(2): 240–67.
28.
RegoASousaFMarquesC, et al. (2012) Authentic Leadership promoting employees’ psychological capital and creativity. Journal of Business Research65(3): 429–437.
29.
SalancikGRPfefferJ (1978) A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly23(2): 224–53.
30.
SchulteMCohenNKleinK (2010) Coevolution of network ties and perceptions. Organization Science23(2): 1–18.
31.
SiemsenERothAVBalasubramanianS, et al. (2009) The influence of psychological safety and confidence in knowledge on employee knowledge sharing. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management11(3): 429–47.
32.
SoaresAELopesMP (2014) Social networks and psychological safety: A model of contagion. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management7(5): 995–1012.
33.
SoetantoDMacDonaldM (2017) Group work and the changes of obstacles over time: The influence of learning style and group composition. Active Learning in Higher Education18 (2): 99–113.
34.
StefanouCStolkJDPrinceM, et al. (2013) Self-regulation and autonomy in problem- and project-based learning environments. Active Learning in Higher Education14(2): 109–22.
35.
TuckerALNembhardIMEdmondsonAC (2007) Implementing new practices: An empirical study of organizational learning in hospital intensive care units. Management Science53(6): 894–907.
36.
ZimmermanBJ (2005) Self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective In: BoekaertsMPintrichPZeidnerM (eds) Handbook of self-regulation. London: Elsevier Academic Press, pp. 13–39.
