This study examined the relationships between collegial principal leadership, trust in the principal, collaboration, and teacher role stress in rural and urban schools in North Alabama. The sample was initially comprised of schools with K-6 grade configurations, later expanded to include a variety of configurations that had a fourth grade. A total of 60 schools of varying grade configurations agreed to participate in this research and 1,665 teachers voluntarily completed surveys. The four instruments used in this study were the Collaboration Survey, and the Teacher Role Stress Survey, the Omnibus Trust Scale, and the Organizational Climate Index (OCI). Specific subsets were used from the first three instruments for this study. Of the three subsets in the Collaboration Survey, only the Collaboration with Principal and Collaboration Among Teacher Colleagues subscales were included. From the Omnibus Trust Scale, only the Faculty Trust in Principal subscale was included. The Collegial Principal Leadership subscale of the Organizational Climate Index (OCI) was also included. The findings supported the hypotheses. Collegial principal leadership and trust in the principal were significant predictors of collaboration, but only collegial principal leadership made a unique contribution toward collaboration in multiple regressions. As predicted, trust in the principal and collegial principal leadership were inversely related to teacher role stress, with only trust in the principal making a unique contribution. Collaboration also had a significant inverse relationship to teacher role stress. Controlling for SES in multiple regressions did not demonstrate any significant differences in the data.

This is a study of the predictors of collective responsibility. Research indicates strong links between collegial behavior, faculty trust in colleagues, and effectiveness (Tarter, Sabo, & Hoy, 1995). Trust as a construct related to collective responsibility is grounded in the logic that building trust between teachers leads to the development of school cultures that promote teacher collaboration (Whalan, 2012). This study examined surveys from 60 elementary schools in Northwest Alabama investigating faculty trust in the principal, collegial trust, and collegial principal leadership, to determine predictors of collective responsibility while controlling for SES. Faculty trust in the principal and faculty trust in colleagues were measured using the Omnibus Trust Scale, collegial principal leadership was measured using the Organizational Climate Index, and Collective Responsibility was measured using the Collective Responsibility Scale. The research results indicated a significant relationship between trust in colleagues and collective responsibility. A significant relationship was not indicated between trust in the principal and collective responsibility or collegial principal leadership and collective responsibility. Also, noteworthy was the finding that SES was not a significant predictor of collective responsibility.

Principal leadership matters. While school principals impact student achievement in mostly indirect ways, the cumulative effect of their agency to design the school program, organize teacher and staff interactions and opportunities to collaborate, and make other important decisions that influence the culture of the school meaningfully affects the experience of staff and students. This research into principal leadership has sought to make a contribution to the understanding of what makes principals effective in their work. The existing research into what makes principals effective has consistently found that any single theory of leadership, like "instructional leadership," in isolated application will not be fully effective across all contexts. Rather, an integrated theory of leadership that recognizes the complexity of the principal role, the necessary emphasis on collective responsibility and action, and the significance of the school context is necessary in order to explore and extend the understanding of effective school leadership. Leading from an inquiry stance offers a framework for principal leadership that builds upon this existing research literature about effective school leadership. Therefore, this study sought to understand what leading from an inquiry stance looked like in practice and its impact on the culture of collaboration among teachers. The findings of this research study indicate that leading from an inquiry stance promotes the culture of collaboration among teachers, "anti-inquiry" practices undermine the culture of collaboration among teachers, and relational trust between principals and their teachers is a critical attribute for effective leadership around a shared vision of school improvement.

This volume provides a succinct up-to-date summary of global research on principal instructional leadership as it has evolved over the past 50 years. The book’s particular focus is on the development and use of the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (PIMRS). The PIMRS is the most widely used survey instrument designed for assessing instructional leadership for research and practice. It has been used in more than 250 studies in more than 30 countries around the world. The authors provide a detailed conceptual and data-based description of the rationale and development of the instrument as well as the ways in which it has been used in practice. The book also provides, for the first time, a comprehensive assessment of the scale’s measurement properties. This represents essential information for future users of the instrument across different national contexts. Finally, the volume outlines an agenda for improving future research on the role of principal instructional leadership in student learning and school effectiveness.

In the continuing global call for educational reforms and change, the contributors in this edited collection address the critical issue of teacher learning from diverse national contexts and perspectives. They define "teacher learning that matters" as it shapes and directs pedagogical practices with the goal of improving student learning. This book weaves together major studies, research findings and theoretical orientations to represent a globalized network of inquiries into the what, how and why of teacher learning that shapes teacher skill and knowledge. Teacher learning matters on an international scale because teachers are the portals through which any initiative for change and reform is realized. Recognizing that a highly skilled teaching force is instrumental to improving student achievement adds import to generating interactive dialogue on teacher learning around the globe.

At the time of this writing, little research had been done regarding principals’ leadership styles and its effect on teachers’ collaboration in a Professional Learning Community (PLC). I completed a quantitative study in which I surveyed 66 teachers in a large school district in the southeast region of the United States about their principal’s leadership styles and their collaboration in PLCs at their schools. I found teacher collaboration in a PLC positively correlated with each component of the transformational leadership style. Similarly, I found there was one positive correlation and one negative correlation between teacher collaboration and the components of the transactional leadership style. Additionally, I found there were two negative correlations between teacher collaboration and the components of the passive-avoidant leadership style. I also found all components of the transformational leadership style were predictors for teacher collaboration while only one component of the transactional leadership style was a predictor for teacher collaboration. Similarly, only one component of the passive-avoidant leadership style was a predictor for teacher collaboration. Finally, I found the transformational leadership style could predict shared and supportive leadership, supportive conditions- relationships, and shared values and visions among the school. I also found passive-avoidant leadership is not a predictor for collaborative learning and application among the staff. Lastly, I found no leadership styles were predictors for shared personal practice and supportive conditions- structures.