School Personnel and Leadership Collaboration Model for Ideal Work Contexts

Abstract

This article describes the school personnel and leadership collaboration (SPLC) model, a shared-responsibility framework for faculty, staff, and administrators. Prior research consistently demonstrates the need for (a) administrative support for teachers and other school personnel and (b) collegial support among staff. The SPLC model represents an amalgamation of this research and, moreover, integrates personnel support for leadership. In the managerial sciences, leader–member exchange (LMX) is a well-known relationship-based leadership approach that focuses on a dyadic or two-way relationship between supervisors and their employees. Though managers are responsible for overseeing operations, personnel contribute ideas, participate in decision-making, and follow through with their responsibilities. LMX is associated with positive work experiences and job performance outcomes. In contrast, schools are often run with a top–down leadership approach that solicits little to no input from staff, leading to low morale, high attrition rates, and negative school climate. Thus, the SPLC model was inspired by LMX and emphasizes practices, such as shared decision-making, staff autonomy, and shared responsibilities. Detailed examples of ways schools may apply the SPLC model to their practices are included.

Psychological distress and coping styles in teachers: A preliminary study

“…In particular, working conditions can impact the quality of teacher instruction and student achievement (Bettini et al, 2017). Administrative support and school leadership are aspects of the teaching environment that predict increased teaching job satisfaction and lower staff attrition (Ansley et al, 2019;Bettini, Cheyney, Wang, & Leko, 2015). It seems that effective administrative support can help to empower teaching staff to perform their roles more effectively (Bettini, Crockett, Brownell, & Merrill, 2016).…”

Benefits of Mindfulness Professional Development for Elementary Teachers

“…Conversely, supportive leadership, collegiality, shared decision-making, and positive school climates can combat these negative stressors and turnover (e.g., Ansley et al, 2019;Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019;Hitt & Tucker, 2016;). Providing support in the form of shared leadership can improve teachers' attitudes, feelings of efficacy, and instructional skills (Hitt & Tucker, 2016).…”

“…Providing support in the form of shared leadership can improve teachers' attitudes, feelings of efficacy, and instructional skills (Hitt & Tucker, 2016). Likewise, schools where administration adopts relational-based leadership models that foster collegiality through shared-responsibility and a sense of autonomy have an increased association with positive feelings about work and job performance (Ansley et al, 2019). Feeling supported and encouraged by administration with a clear vision for the school can also mitigate other turnover factors relating to the challenges of teaching in schools with mostly underserved students in rural environments (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019).…”

“…Since supportive administration in positive school climates have large impacts on decreasing teacher turnover, even in the most challenging contexts (e.g., Ansley et al, 2019;Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019;Hitt & Tucker, 2016), district and school leaders need more research-based ways to meet the needs of their teachers, especially when experiencing stress due to the demands of the profession. Overall, teacher well-being and job retention are essential to cultivating the best environments for student learning.…”

“…The principal's support of giving teachers time to learn, practice collaboratively, and reflect on mindfulness became an added benefit to teachers building mindfulness and handling daily stressors. Current experts in the field find teachers' perceptions regarding principal's support were directly related to decreases in teacher turnover, the reduction reduces stress, and teacher self-efficacy (e.g., Ansley et al, 2019;Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019;Flook et al, 2013;Hitt & Tucker, 2016;Roeser et al, 2012).…”