Main Article Content
Educational leaders continually search for effective practices to improve schools. A quantitative study was conducted to determine what transformative behaviors a leader could use to improve collective teacher efficacy at the level of the entire faculty and at the level of grade level teams. The purpose of this article is to suggest ways a leader could use the inverse relationship between transformational leadership and collective teacher efficacy to create higher levels of collective teacher efficacy in a school as a means to enhance performance. The Collective Efficacy Scale (Goddard, 2001) was modified to measure the perceptions of teachers at both levels; entire faculty’s collective efficacy and the collective efficacy of their team. Thus, this article also provides leaders with important information regarding teaming within schools. The significant difference found between collective teacher efficacy at the level of school and team, provides important information for leaders to consider as they support various professional learning teams. Success for all would be promoted as leaders increase efficacy within teams by employing the concepts of developing leadership teams and purposeful learning communities (Hill & Lundquist, 2008).
Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
Goddard, R. (2001). Collective efficacy: A neglected construct in the study of schools and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 467-476.
Goddard, R. (2002). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the measurement of collective efficacy: The development of the short form. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(6), 1071-1084.
Goddard, R., & Goddard, Y. (2001). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between teacher and collective efficacy in urban schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 807-818.
Goddard, R., Hoy, W., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and effect on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507.
Hoy, W., & Woolfolk, A. (1993). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and the organizational health of schools. Elementary School Journal, 93, 335-372.
Leithwood, K. (October, 29-31, 1993). Contributions of transformational leadership to school restructuring. Paper presented at the Convention of the University Council for Educational Administration, Houston, TX.
Leithwood, K. (2006, October 10). Nature of leadership 95 scale reliabilities. Message sent to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (April, 18-22, 1995). Toward an explanation of how teachers’ perceptions of transformational school leadership are formed. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Prelli, G. (2007). Correlation between Transformational Leadership and Collective Teacher Efficacy at the Group Level. Doctoral dissertation, Central Connecticut State University.