In the present study, the direct effect of principal transformational leadership to school staff turnover and school performance was examined, in addition to its indirect effect through school staff job satisfaction. Survey data were obtained from elementary school staff and students, and school-aggregated student achievement test scores were obtained from school archives. Results showed that staff reports of principal behaviors could be described in terms of the three components of transformational leadership: inspiration or charisma, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation. Principal transformational leadership was not associated directly with either school staff turnover or school-aggregated student achievement progress. Rather, principal transformational leadership showed an indirect effect, through staff job satisfaction, on school staff turnover (negative) and on school-aggregated student achievement progress (positive). Finally, higher levels of school staff job satisfaction were associated with smaller achievement gaps between minority and non-minority students. This result was more evident among schools having higher levels of principal transformational leadership. Results are discussed in relation to the role of transformational leadership in school performance and in recruiting, training, and evaluating school principals. Conceptions of school leadershipClassic studies of school administration (Halpin, 1966) described school leadership as providing "structure" and "consideration". Structure referred to the extent administrators provided staff and materials necessary for effective instruction and student learning. Consideration referred to the extent administrators developed mutual trust and respect, and shared norms and values among school staff necessary for positive and productive social relations. In a series of in-depth interviews of teachers, Blase (1987) provided more detailed behaviors of school leadership. Effective school principals, as described by teachers, had clear and well-articulated goals; delegated tasks to others; encouraged staff to participate in decision-making; incorporated others

No abstract

No abstract

Due to seemingly mixed empirical results, questions persist about the possible role of deployments and combat exposure. We conducted a narrative review and meta-analysis of 22 published studies to integrate findings regarding the relationship of deployment-related predictors (i.e., deployment, deployment to a combat zone, combat experience, and exposure to specific combat events) with suicide-related outcomes (i.e., suicide ideation, attempt, and death). Across all predictors and outcomes, the combined effect was small and positive, r = .08 [0.04, 0.13], and marked by significant heterogeneity, I = 99.9%, Q(21)=4880.16, p < .0001, corresponding to a 25% increased risk for suicide-related outcomes among those who have deployed. Studies examining the relationship between exposure to killing and atrocities (k = 5) showed the largest combined effect, r = .12 [0.08, 0.17], and less heterogeneity, I = 84.4%, Q(4)=34.96, p < .0001, corresponding to a 43% increased risk for suicide-related outcomes among those exposed to killing or atrocity. Implications for theory, research, and clinical practice are discussed.

No abstract