Building and Sustaining Successful School Leadership in New Zealand

Notman, Ross; Henry, D. Annie

doi:10.1080/15700763.2011.610555

Cited by 30 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…School leaders who create bonds of trust help create the conditions that inspire teachers to move to higher levels of effort and achievement [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. In contrast, when teachers and principals do not trust one another, each seeks to minimize their vulnerability and risk by adopting self-protective stances.…”

Section: Trust and Student Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principals, Trust, and Cultivating Vibrant Schools

Tschannen‐Moran

Gareis

2015

Societies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although principals are ultimately held accountable to student learning in their buildings, the most consistent research results have suggested that their impact on student achievement is largely indirect. Leithwood, Patten, and Jantzi proposed four paths through which this indirect influence would flow, and the purpose of this special issue is to examine in greater depth these mediating variables. Among mediating variables, we assert that trust is key. In this paper, we explore the evidence that points to the role that faculty trust in the principal plays in student learning and how principals can cultivate trust by attending to the five facets of trust, as well as the correlates of trust that mediate student learning, including academic press, collective teacher efficacy, and teacher professionalism. We argue that trust plays a role in each of the four paths identified by Leithwood, Patten, and Jantzi. Finally, we explore possible new directions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Trust and Student Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principals, Trust, and Cultivating Vibrant Schools

Tschannen‐Moran

Gareis

2015

Societies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of specificity, levels of principals’ envisioning, instructional management, and empowerment were the highest in well-endowed schools (i.e., highest proportion of qualified science teachers and adequate science resources) as compared to the other two types of schools. Principals of schools staffed by qualified teachers may be more likely to focus on setting shared goals (i.e., envisioning) because these teachers have greater capacity to achieve these goals ( Notman and Henry, 2011 ). Principals of well-resourced schools may also be more involved in envisioning because there are adequate resources for realizing school academic goals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They also worked closely with parents and the community to improve student outcomes. Notman and Henry’s (2011) qualitative study of six New Zealand primary and secondary school principals showed that principals highlighted the importance of developing learning and social assistance programs to address student and family needs for schools in lower-SES areas. The principals also demonstrated contingent leadership in response to external influences related to community support, inadequacy of financial resources from the central government, and the school’s SES context, in order to sustain their leadership success over time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different Patterns of Relationships Between Principal Leadership and 15-Year-Old Students’ Science Learning: How School Resources, Teacher Quality, and School Socioeconomic Status Make a Difference

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study critically evaluates whether school leadership influences student learning homogenously regardless of school contexts. It examined relationships between four principal leadership variables (envisioning, instructional management, promoting professional development, empowerment) and two types of student outcomes (enjoyment in learning science, science achievement) in different school contexts [in terms of the availability of science resources, quality of science teachers, and school socioeconomic status (SES)]. The sample comprised 248,620 students and 9,370 principals in 35 developed countries who participated in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015. Latent profile analysis (LPA) showed that schools operated in three types of school contexts with different levels of science resources, proportion of quality science teachers, and school SES. There were also differences in the pattern of leadership practices across the three types of school contexts. Three-level hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) showed that among the four leadership variables, only instructional management was positively associated with students’ enjoyment of science in schools with less science resources and quality science teachers. Therefore, instructional management had compensatory effects for students in less-endowed schools. In contrast, principal leadership related to envisioning, teacher professional development, and empowerment was not positively related to students’ science learning in all three school contexts.

show abstract

“…According to Notman and Henry (2010), effective principals use multiple leadership strategies for leading teachers to raised levels of student achievement. The following are leadership strategies used by principals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%