International Journal of Education

ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

The Role of Teacher Leaders in School Improvement

through the Perceptions of Principals and Teachers

Nancy Akert1 & Barbara N. Martin2,*

1
Superintendent, Shawnee R-III, Chilhowee, Missouri, 64722, United States
2
College of Education, University of Central Missouri, Warrensburg, Missouri 64093, United
States
*Corresponding author: College of Education, University of Central Missouri, 4105 Lovinger
Hall, Warrensburg, Missouri 64093, United States
Tel: 1-660-543-8823 E-mail: [email protected]

Received: August 23, 2012 Accepted: September 27, 2012 Published: December 19, 2012
doi:10.5296/ije.v4i4.2290 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ije.v4i4.2290

Abstract
These researchers examined the perceptions of fifteen principals and 96 classroom teachers
regarding the role of teacher leadership in school improvement. The data revealed significant
differences in how principals and teachers perceive teachers involvement in teacher
leadership roles, in ratings of involvement of teachers in leadership roles when compared to
the ratings of how involved they would like to be in those same roles, and how principals and
teachers perceived the impact of teacher leadership roles on school improvement.
Implications for practice are important to principals, teachers, and district level personnel.
Keywords: teacher leadership; school improvement

284 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

1. Introduction
Over the past several years, teacher leadership has become an established feature of
educational reform. A number of interconnected factors argue for the necessity of teacher
leadership in schools (Danielson, 2006). Ghamrawi (2010) postulated, The culture of teacher
leadership entails that teachers engage in professional dialogue with colleagues; share ideas,
knowledge, and techniques, participate in collaborative problem-solving around classroom
issues, hone provocative lessons in teams, exhibit passionate professionalism and enjoy
extensive opportunities for collegial professional dialogue (p.315). Teacher leaders help
direct the entire school toward higher standards of achievement and recognition of individual
responsibility for school reform. Teacher leaders do not wait to be appointed to a formal role
before they offer their expertise and influence to others in order to impact the educational
experience of all students (Hatch, White, & Faigenbaum, 2005). Teachers continue to
undergo significant change as they are expected to exhibit leadership (Anderson, 2004). This
change is embraced by some principals while misunderstood by others, thus leading to
confusion and a skewed perception as to how the role of teacher leadership corresponds with
the overall school organization. In fact, Scribner and Bradley-Levine (2010) argued, In
practice, it behooves leaders interested in cultivating teacher leadership directed toward
influencing substantive school transformation to actively recognize leadership practices.
(p.156). However, this reform movement toward teacher leadership needs to be a
collaborative effort between the principal and the teaching staff. Birky, Shelton, and Headley
(2006) stated, Although the importance of teacher leaders is recognized, teacher leaders are
seldom effective in their roles without the support and encouragement of their administrator
(p. 89). The concept of teacher leadership and the influence it has on schools is significant,
and more information about the nature of the relationship between teacher leaders and the
principals and the influences that impact teacher leadership is warranted. Therefore, the
purpose of this quantitative study was three fold. First, the researchers strived to gain a better
understanding of perceptions of teacher leadership roles from the point of view of the teacher
and principal and any differences that may occur between the two positions. Secondly, the
study examined the teachers overall interest of stepping into a teacher leadership position
and ways they are encouraged or discouraged to take on this challenge. Thirdly, studied was
the extent to which principals and teachers believe the teacher leadership roles contribute to
the overall school improvement.
1.1 Conceptual Underpinnings
Barth (2001) declared Schools badly need the leadership of teachers if they are to
improve (p. 84). Furthermore, research in the area of teacher leadership has progressively
concentrated on the value that teacher leaders have for students, fellow teachers, and
administrators (Birky, Shelton, & Headley, 2006; Danielson, 2006). Thus, the conceptual
framework of teacher leadership framed this inquiry.
1.1.1 Teacher leader defined
The concept of teacher as leader and leader as teacher (Birky, Shelton, & Headley,
2006) has gained new recognition, but with some disagreement as to the definition of a

285 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

teacher leader. Patterson and Patterson (2004) defined a teacher leader as someone who
works with colleagues for the purpose of improving teaching and learning, whether in a
formal or an informal capacity (p. 74), whereas Danielson (2006) referred to it as a set of
skills demonstrated by teachers who continue to teach students but also have an influence that
extends beyond their own classrooms to others within their own school and elsewhere (p.
12). Andrews and Crowther (2002) simplified the meaning by describing teacher leadership
as the power of teaching to shape meaning for children, youth, and adults (p. 154).
Childs-Bowen, Moller, and Scrivners (2000) conception of teacher leadership stated We
believe teachers are leaders when they function in professional learning communities to affect
student learning; contribute to school improvement; inspire excellence in practice; and
empower stakeholders to participate in educational improvement (p.28). Although differing
slightly in their definitions, all agree that influence from teacher leaders is not strictly
contained within the confines of classrooms, but extends out to include all those impacted by
innovative leadership skills recognizing ways to improve schools (Andrew & Crowther, 2002;
Childs-Bowen, et al., 2000; Danielson, 2006).
1.1.2 Greater Participation
York-Barr and Duke (2004) argued teacher leadership develops greater participation by
interested teachers which leads to ownership and commitment to the established school goals.
By allowing teacher leaders the power of shared decision making, they become committed to
decisions that emerge. Webb, Neumann, and Jones (2004) acknowledged that since teachers
provide such a powerful input into the changes and conditions in the classroom teachers
need to see themselves as leaders or having the potential and responsibility for leadership (p.
254). The positive effect is that teachers morale and sense of self-efficacy heighten. As
teachers collaborate and develop professional networks with others, they enjoy ownership in
their special projects, thus motivating them intrinsically (Muijs & Harris, 2006).
1.1.3 Professionalism
In addition, teacher leadership has been portrayed as a means to move teaching toward a
higher level of professionalism (Moller & Pankake, 2006). By taking this step forward
toward teacher leadership, teachers feel empowered thus motivating themselves to have
improved performance in the classrooms (Muijs & Harris, 2006). Childs-Bowen, Moller, and
Scrivner (2000) insisted that Teacher leadership contributions are critical to improving
teacher quality and ensuring that education reform efforts work (p.33). For some teachers
this might include stepping out of their comfort zone to take on more responsibilities and
agreeing to share successful teaching techniques with their colleagues.
1.1.4 Teacher Collaboration
Consequently, teachers are more likely to stay in those individual schools where a
culture of teacher collaboration and leadership exists (Muijs & Harris, 2006). This allows
them time to cultivate stronger teams based on trust where initiatives are easier to start
because of the strong safety net of supporters already established. As teacher leadership
grows within a school system, it allows the system to be more self-monitoring and

286 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

self-improving, thus allowing the improvement programs of the school a better chance of
surviving changes in formal leadership (Moller & Pankake, 2006).
1.1.5 Power Struggles
Moller and Pankake (2006) declared power struggles can arise in schools when the goals
of the principals and the teachers are not aligned. As a result, these researchers went on to
detail three ways for which building teacher leadership will reduce power struggles. First,
teachers will have more information on which to base decisions and will understand why
decisions are made. Second, teacher leaders are usually those teachers who can communicate
collective decisions effectively with others both within and outside the school. Finally,
teachers who take on leadership roles and are more informed, can move away from their
dependence on the principal and assume responsibility for collective decisions rather than
blaming unpopular ideas on the principal (p. 34).
1.1.6 Leadership Reciprocity
If principals are to meet the ever expanding demands of leadership in the 21st century, it
becomes necessary for them to enlist help from teacher leaders (Moller & Pankake, 2006)
and equally important, it is imperative for the principal to encourage and inspire teachers to
become leaders. Anderson (2004) discussed the importance of leadership reciprocity (p.
106) that occurs when there is a mutual and interactive influence of teacher leadership on
principals as well as a reciprocal influence of principal leadership on teachers. It is important
for principals to nurture these leadership tendencies in teachers (Moller & Pankake, 2006)
because the principals role in relation to teacher leadership and school improvement is
crucial (Andrews & Crowther, 2002). However, like all of the changing conceptions of
teacher leadership, principal leadership has also undergone a change in perspective.
1.1.7 Intentional Principal Behaviors
As Ash and Persall (2000) contended creating an organizational culture and
infrastructure that supports leadership opportunities for everyone requires principals to have
an altogether different set of leadership skills than have previously been necessary (p. 15).
This view on leading requires intentional actions on the part of the principals to establish
mutual trust and respect, a sense of shared directionality, distributed power, and allowance for
individual expression (Andrews & Crowther, 2002; Moller & Pankake, 2006). Moreover,
Childs-Bowen, Moller, and Scrivner (2000) pointed out the importance of todays principals
having the knowledge and ability to create an atmosphere of trust to allow teachers to expand
on their leadership abilities. Therefore, the role of principal is paramount in intentionally
creating internal structures and conditions that promote teacher leadership (Youngs & King,
2002).
1.1.8 Parallelism
The principal has the important role of establishing a vision leading toward the common
purpose of cultivating a culture ready to handle successful school improvement through the
facilitation of teacher leaders (Lambert, 2003). To succeed in this vision, principals and

287 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

teachers need to work together, creating a full rich culture of trust and collaboration between
the two leadership positions (Andrews & Crowther, 2002). In support of this belief, using
research from their study of nine schools, Andrews and Crowther concluded:
In exploring the dynamics of teachers leadership roles in successful school projects in
phase two of the research, it became evident that the relationship in question could not be
fully understood or appreciated in isolation from the work of principals. Indeed, in none of
our phase two case studies was teacher leadership found to flourish independently of the
principal. (pg. 154) Furthermore, Andrews and Crowther (2002) affirmed that this new
educational concept, known as parallelism, placed equivalent value on teacher leadership and
principal leadership (p. 155).
1.1.9 Support of Principal
As Katzenmeyer and Moller (2001) stated, Although progress has been made in
recognizing that the principals job is about creating a culture in which principals and
teachers lead together, our experience is that this perspective is not widespread (p. 84).
Nevertheless, the roles of teacher leaders are seldom effective without the support and
encouragement of their administrators (Birky, Shelton, & Headley, 2006). Since teacher
leadership plays an important role in school improvement, appropriate principal actions are
necessary for encouraging and promoting such leadership (Birky et al.; Katzenmeyer &
Moller). Moreover, because teacher leaders are influenced by their principals actions, it is
important for principals to understand what motivates and what discourages teachers to
become leaders. Danielson (2006) declared:
The strict bureaucratic hierarchies are not sufficient, nor are other approaches that place
teachers in the role of receiver of accepted wisdom. Rather, to bring the best to bear on the
challenges of education, the engagement of teacher leaders in the enterprise is an important
component of any improvement strategy. (p. 27)
Thus, the framework for teacher leadership represents a movement of skilled
administrator leadership teaming with educators who have the desire to remain in the
classroom yet extend their expertise and knowledge to others in the profession (Danielson,
2006). So as the research suggests, the importance of principals willing to utilize different
leadership skills in order to promote teacher leadership is paramount in creating a school
culture that enhances collaboration and collegiality among the schools members. School
leaders must foster this leadership in their teachers in order for successful school
improvement.

2. Methodology
The population involved in this study consisted of principals and teachers throughout a
Midwestern state. A representative sample of principals (n=15) was chosen by first
categorizing school districts into three size categories, large, midsized, and small, then
randomly choosing five districts within each category. A total of 214 surveys were then sent

288 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

out to the classroom teachers working with those 15 principals, with ninety-six surveys
(teachers, n=96) being returned, yielding a return rate of 45%.
2.1 Instrumentation
This study utilized an electronic survey for data collection. The researchers created
Teacher Leadership Roles Survey (TLRS) was used to measure the perceptions of principals
and teachers regarding the concept of teacher leadership and school improvement. A portion
of the survey was adapted with permission by Birky et al. (2006), with the rest created by the
researchers based on information gleaned from the extensive review of the literature. For the
first portion of the survey, principals and teachers used a four point Likert scale to describe
teacher involvement in various leadership roles. The teachers had an additional portion on
their survey to describe how involved they would like to be in the same leadership roles. The
third portion of the survey allowed the participants to rate their beliefs in the importance of
teacher leadership roles on overall student achievement. The test-retest correlations for the
twenty statements range from a low of r = .902 to a high of r = 1.0. All correlations in the
test-retest were significant at the .01 level (see Table 1). An example of the survey is at the
end of this paper.
Table 1: Test-Retest Reliability of Survey Instrument by Question
Question for Part A Leadership Roles r Sig. (2-tailed)
Question 1 .903 .01
Question 2 1.0 .01
Question 3 1.0 .01
Question 4 .951 .01
Question 5 .926 .01
Question 6 .951 .01
Question 7 .956 .01
Question 8 1.0 .01
Question 9 .969 .01
Question 10 1.0 .01
Question for Part B School Improvement r Sig. (2-tailed)
Question 1 .906 .01
Question 2 .903 .01
Question 3 .934 .01
Question 4 .906 .01
Question 5 .941 .01
Question 6 .914 .01
Question 7 .964 .01
Question 8 .915 .01
Question 9 1.0 .01
Question 10 .917 .01

289 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

2.1.2 Data Analysis

The data from the TLRS derived from selected principals and teachers were collected,
tabulated, and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version
18.0. To determine if there were significant differences between perceptions of principals and
teachers in regard to teacher leadership roles, t-tests for independent means were conducted.
Mean scores for each of the ten statements was determined by averaging the scores given by
principals and also by teachers. For each statement, t-tests were calculated to determine if
significant differences existed between the ratings given by principals and ratings given by
teachers. This allowed the researchers to determine whether the means of the two samples
were significant (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003, p. 241). Next, used was a paired t-test to
determine if there were significant differences between the ratings of teachers involvement
in teacher leadership roles compared to the ratings of how involved they would like to be.
Again mean scores for each of the ten statements were determined by averaging the score
given by the teachers in the column for how involved they are and also for how involved they
would like to be. The mean scores were then compared for each of the ten statements between
the two columns. Again this allowed whether the means of the two samples were significant
(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003, p. 241). Data were collected and a mean score was determined for
each of the ten statements. The mean scores were then listed from highest to lowest for each
category (teacher and principal). Moreover, to determine if there, were significant differences
between teachers and principals on the perceived impact of teacher leadership roles on school
improvement, t-tests for independent means were again conducted. Mean scores for each of
the ten statements was determined by averaging the scores given by principals and also by
teachers. For each statement, t-tests were calculated to determine if significant differences
existed between the ratings given by principals and ratings given by teachers. This further
determined whether the means of the two samples were significant (Fraenkel & Wallen,
2003, p. 241). Statistical significance was determined at the .05 level of confidence.

3. Findings
An independent-samples t-test was conducted to evaluate differences between the
ratings from principals and teachers when it pertains to teacher involvement in teacher
leadership roles. The mean score for principals was 2.8060 (SD = .57087) while the mean
score for teachers was 2.1940 (SD = .67183). Assumed for each test were Equal variances.
Illustrated in Table 2 is significant difference between the mean score of principals and
teachers, t(18) = 2.195, p = .042.

290 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

Table 2: Comparison of Teachers Involvement in Teacher Leadership Roles

Group N Mean Standard Std. Error t df Sig.

Deviation of Mean (2-tailed)

Principal 10 2.8060 .57087 .18053 2.195 18 .042

Teacher 10 2.1940 .67183 .21245 2.195 17.543 .042

Further analysis of the mean scores yielded information of interest relating to the
perceptions of the role of teacher leadership in each specific area surveyed. A comparison of
the mean score of each individual statement, as shown in Table 3, reveals the perceptions of
the principals are higher than the perceptions of the teachers in regard to teacher leadership
roles within their schools in all areas. The largest difference in the mean scores was in the
area of setting promotion and retention policies. The mean scores for the principals fell
within the range of often (2.50 to 3.49) whereas the mean scores for the teachers fell within
the range of seldom (1.50 to 2.49). There were four areas where the mean scores for both the
principals and the teachers fell within the same range: setting standards for student behavior,
often; deciding school budgets, seldom; evaluating teacher performance, seldom; selecting
new teachers, seldom. Data indicated, when comparing the overall mean scores for principals
compared to those of the teachers, the principals perceived teachers Often (3) participating in
the stated teacher roles, whereas the teachers perceived themselves as Seldom (2)
participating in the roles.
Table 3: Mean Scores for Statements Concerning Participation in Teacher Leadership Roles

Statement Principal Teacher Total

Mean Mean Mean
Choosing textbooks and instructional materials 3.73 2.89 3.31
Shaping the curriculum 3.53 2.97 3.25
Setting standards for student behavior 3.40 3.25 3.33
Tracking students into special classes 2.80 2.37 2.59
Designing staff development/in-services 2.80 2.39 2.59
Setting promotion and retention policies 2.73 1.68 2.21
Deciding school budgets 2.27 1.81 2.04
Evaluating teacher performance 2.13 1.58 1.86
Selecting new teachers 2.40 1.64 2.02
Selecting new administrators 2.27 1.36 1.82
Overall Mean Score 2.81 2.19

The mean score for the teachers perceived involvement in the leadership role was

291 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

2.1940 (SD = .67183), while the mean score for how involved teachers wanted to be in
leadership roles was 2.9540 (SD = .40001) as noted in Table 4.
Table 4: Comparison of Actual Teacher Involvement to How Involved They Want to Be
Involved

Teacher Involvement N Mean Standard Deviation Std. Error of Mean

Actual 10 2.1940 .67183 .21245
Wish to be 10 2.9540 .40001 .12649

Note: N=96
In Table 5 the dependent samples t-test indicated that there was significant difference,
t(9) = 7.485, p<.001, between the ratings of involvement of teachers in leadership roles when
compared to the ratings of how involved they would like to be in those same roles.
Table 5: Differences between Actual Teacher Involvement and How Involved They Wish to
Be
Teacher N Mean Standard Std. Error t df Sig.
Involvement Deviation of Mean (2-tailed)
Involvement 10 .7600 .32107 .10153 7.485 9 .000

Note: N=96
Further analysis of the mean scores, as recorded in Table 6, showed that teachers in the
study did not feel they were as involved in teacher leadership roles as they would like to be.
This held true for all of the ten statements, although several of the mean scores fell within the
same range. The mean scores for choosing textbooks and instructional materials and shaping
the curriculum all fell within the often range (2.50 to 3.49) yet the higher mean in the wish to
be involved column suggests the teachers would like to be more involved than they currently
are in their school settings.. The greatest difference in the mean scores was for the statement
concerning selecting new administrators. The range indicates teachers felt they actually were
never a part of this (1.00 to 1.49), but indicated they would often like to be (2.50 to 3.49).

292 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

Table 6. Mean Scores for Comparison of Teacher Involvement to Wish to be Involved

Actual Involvement Wish to be Involved

Statement Mean Mean

Choosing textbooks and instructional materials 2.89 3.45

Shaping the curriculum 2.97 3.45
Setting standards for student behavior 3.25 3.53
Tracking students into special classes 2.37 2.85
Designing staff development/in-services 2.39 3.11
Setting promotion and retention policies 1.68 2.61
Deciding school budgets 1.81 2.61
Evaluating teacher performance 1.58 2.47
Selecting new teachers 1.64 2.80
Selecting new administrators 1.36 2.66

Note: N=96

The mean scores were determined and analyzed for each of the ten statements pertaining
to impact of teacher leadership on school improvement. Scores produced information of
interest when comparing the two groups. Reported in Table 7 are the mean scores listed from
highest to lowest for principals and teachers for their ratings of the impact of the ten major
concepts in regard to school improvement. The mean scores for the first eight concepts of
importance to school improvement for the principals fell within the range of Strongly Agree
(3.50 to 4.00), whereas only the first five concepts listed for the teachers fell within that same
range. The final five mean scores of the teachers fell within the range of Somewhat Agree
(2.50 to 3.49). Overall, when comparing the mean scores, the principals averaged in the
Strongly Agree (3.50 to 4.00) range, whereas the teachers averaged within the Somewhat
Agree (2.50 to 3.49) range.

293 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

Table 7: Mean Scores for Impact of Teacher Leadership on School Improvement

Statement Principal Means Statement Teacher Means
Collaboration of teachers 4.00 Modeling leadership skills 3.69
Modeling leadership skills 3.93 Collaboration of teachers 3.68
Attending to the learning of the entire 3.80 Atmosphere provided in classroom 3.59
school community
Atmosphere provided in classroom 3.73 Stepping outside of traditional roles 3.57
View themselves as leaders 3.73 View themselves as leaders 3.50
Stepping outside of traditional roles 3.71 Attending to the learning of the entire 3.40
school community
Networking with other schools and 3.71 Clear vision and established goals 3.31
programs
Clear vision and established goals 3.53 Networking with other schools and 3.31
programs
Establish and implement expectations 3.47 Establish and implement expectations 3.26
and standards and standards
Working with staff to establish a feeling 3.40 Working with staff to establish a feeling 3.22
of trust not only in the individual of trust not only in the individual
classrooms but in the entire building classrooms but in the entire building
Overall Mean Score 3.70 Overall Mean Score 3.45

Note: N=96 teachers and N=15 Principals

Independent samples t-tests indicated there was a significant difference between the
overall mean score of the principals and the overall mean score of the teachers on the
perceived impact of teacher leadership roles on school improvement. The mean scores for the
principals was 3.7010 (SD = .19052, while the mean score for the teachers was 3.4530 (SD
= .17563). Equal variances were assumed for each test. The test showed significant difference
between the two groups, t(18) = 3.027, p = .007, as reported in Table 8.
Table 8: Comparison of Perceived Impact of Teacher Leadership Roles on School
Improvement
Group N Mean Standard Std. Error t df Sig.
Deviation of Mean (2-tailed)
Principal 10 3.7010 .19052 .06025 3.027 18 .007
Teacher 10 3.4530 .17563 .05554 3.027 17.882 .007

Note: N=96 teachers and N=15 Principals

294 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

4. Discussion
Throughout the survey, the principals rankings were higher than those of the teachers
rankings regarding teacher leadership roles. Additionally, the data indicated that principals
place more importance on the role of teacher leaders and the impact it has on school
improvement than the teachers. Other researchers (Andrews & Crowther, 2002; Barth, 2001;
Danielson, 2006; Durrant & Holden, 2006) have agreed that constructing teacher leadership
in schools is vitally important, but equally significant is the idea that in order for teacher
leadership to flourish, principals must be prepared to step into a different type of leadership
position (Copland, 2001). Data from this investigation indicated the principals felt their
leadership position was allowing teachers to be active in leadership roles. Subsequently the
responses from the teachers, when compared to responses of principals, showed they did not
feel they were as active, nor allowed to be as active in leadership roles in the schools. In order
to allow teacher leadership to flourish, principals must establish structures within the school
facilitate the enhancement of teacher dialogue and critical conversations as a significant
means for developing school goals and visions (Anderson, 2004; Danielson; Moller &
Pankake, 2006). Principals are aware that teachers are an essential part of school
improvement, and must allow the teachers to assume the role of leader within the school
environment to allow for the success of the students. For teacher leadership to be successful,
both the principals and the teachers must understand and value the importance of the position,
and continually strive to communicate to enhance both the role of the principal and the role of
teacher leaders. One of the keys to successful implementation of teacher leadership is the
principal acceptance of the importance of the creating a culture where the followers feel
trust, admiration, loyalty, and respect toward the leader, and they are motivated to do more
than they originally expected to do (Yukl, 2006, p. 262). These findings demonstrated the
importance of the principals creating such a culture since the teachers indicated a desire and
willingness to be more active in teacher leadership positions, and revealed they could be and
wanted to be more involved in decisions and activities within the building that directly
affected the process of school improvement. However, in order to achieve this, the teachers
input and voices must be heard and valued in a substantial way that will foster school
improvement. Consequently, intrinsic values of the teachers were identified as key aspects for
encouraging teachers to step into the role of teacher leader. Teachers reported they felt
motivated by their inner desire and sense of gratification when they shared their talents and
abilities with their colleagues and their students. By allowing teachers the power of becoming
a teacher leader on their own, perhaps their morale and sense of self value will be heightened,
thus motivating them intrinsically. The principal must create such a culture that will allow
teachers to offer their skill sets to influence others ultimately impacting the learning
experience for all within the school setting. The caveat: while teachers might want to seek
teacher leadership roles, the lack of necessary time to successfully implement the
responsibilities that come with the role are lacking, resulting in teachers being hesitant to
volunteer for additional workloads. Responses varied in details, but overall the teachers felt
discouraged from becoming teacher leaders because of the time commitment that takes them
out of their classroom and also time that would take them away from their families. An
additional caveat with time is that the majority of the principals did not note that the time

295 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

commitment of leadership roles by teachers was an issue, thereby perhaps not creating
structures within the school day that would allow teachers to do many of the responsibilities
of being a teacher leader.

5. Conclusions
The expectation for all schools to create an environment of learning for all students
weighs heavily on the shoulders of educators resulting in the need for expanded leadership
capacity. In order for successful school improvement to become embodied throughout the
culture of a school, the roles of both the principals and teachers must change. Embracing
teachers as leaders is an important step toward success, but it will require changes for both
the teachers as well as the principals. Because teacher leaders are influenced by their
principals actions, it is important for principals to understand what motivates each of their
teachers and take time to discover what is happening in their school environment that is
discouraging teachers to become leaders. The responsibilities and behaviors of principals
understanding and communicating the idea of teacher leaders and finding a myriad of ways to
encourage teachers to step into those leadership roles is of utmost importance when
considering the goal of student achievement. At the same time Angell and DeHart (2011)
argued, School leaders must understand that teachers may have the desire to lead and may
have the skills to lead but administrators, in the understanding of leadership beyond the
classroom, must provide the opportunities for these teachers to lead (p.156). As this research
revealed, the importance of principals willing to utilize different leadership skills in order to
promote teacher leadership is paramount in creating a school culture that enhances
collaboration and collegiality among the schools members. School leaders must foster this
leadership capacity within their teachers in order for school improvement to sustain and be
successful.

6. Implications for Practice

The studys findings have a myriad of implications for building principals, school
district personnel, and teachers. One of the most critical aspects of increasing teacher
leadership is communication between the principals and the teachers. The differences in the
perceptions between the principals and the teachers indicated a necessity for both positions to
have opportunities to collaborate and design ways they could move toward a common goal.
Principals need to be trained on how to cultivate teacher leaders concurrently with teachers
being trained on what is teacher leadership and it can be both formal and informal leadership
roles. While planning for professional development school districts would benefit by
providing awareness programs on leadership capacity and how to successful create a school
culture that values such processes. Furthermore, opening lines of dialogues through reflection
and professional development could establish expectations from varying viewpoints, enabling
teachers and principals alike to understand the role of teacher leader and work toward school
improvement by enhancing leadership capacity. Teachers willing and wanting to become

296 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

teacher leaders need opportunities to build networks, collaborate with fellow teachers, and
focus on continuous learning to enhance student achievement. Careful planning needs to be
done by principals and district leaders to facilitate such opportunities to include components
that are essential to the development of the teacher as a leader. By establishing opportunities
for participation, teachers augment teacher leadership roles, developing commitments toward
common goals, and motivating themselves to have improved performance in their classrooms.
Only by understanding teacher leadership can a principal effectively enhance the leadership
capacity within the school setting. Principals need to be ready to embrace, encourage, and
support innovation and creativity from their teachers and be prepared to celebrate leadership,
innovation, and expertise they can provide to school improvement initiatives. Additionally
leadership preparatory programs should address the issue of teacher leadership and provide
opportunities for aspiring principals to understand and implement strategies that will enhance
leadership capacity within their school settings.

References
Anderson, K. D. (2004). The nature of teacher leadership in schools as reciprocal influences
between teacher leaders and principals. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
15(1), 97-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/sesi.15.1.97.27489
Andrews, D., & Crowther, F. (2002). Parallel leadership: A clue to the contents of the black
box of school reform. The International Journal of Educational Management, 16(4),
152-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513540210432128
Angell, P.S., & DeHart, C.A. (2011). Teacher perceptions of teacher leadership: Examining
differences by experience, degree, and position. NASSP Bulletin, 95, 141 -160.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192636511415397
Ash, R. C., & Persall, J. M. (2000). The principal as chief learning officer: Developing
teacher leaders. NASSP Bulletin, 85, 15-22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019263650008461604
Barth, R. (2001). Learning by heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Birky, V. D., Shelton, M. & Headley, S. (2006). An administrators challenge: Encouraging
teachers to be leaders. NASSP Bulletin, 90(2), 87-101.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192636506290155
Childs-Bowen, D., Moller, G., & Scrivner, J. (2000). Principals: Leaders of leaders. NASSP
Bulletin, 85, 27-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019263650008461606
Copland, M. A. (2001). The myth of the superprincipal. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(7), 528-533.
Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership: That strengthens professional practice. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Durrant, J., & Holden, G. (2006). Teachers leading change: Doing research for school

297 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education
(5th edition). Boston, MA. McGraw-Hill.
Ghamrawi , N. (2010) No teacher left behind: Subject leadership that promotes teacher
Leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(3), 304-320.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1741143209359713
Hatch, T., White, M., & Faigenbaum, D. (2005). Expertise, credibility, and influence: How
teachers can influence policy, advance research, and improve performance. Teachers
College Record, 107(5), 1004-1035. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00502.x
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2001). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers
develop as leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Moller, G., & Pankake, A. (2006). Lead with me: A principals guide to teacher leadership.
New York: Eye on Education.
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the
UK. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 961-972.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.010
Patterson, J., & Patterson, J. (2004). Sharing the lead. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 74-78.
Scribner, J. S., & Bradley-Levine, J. (2010). The meaning(s) of teacher leadership in an urban
high school reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(4), 491-522.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X10383831
Webb, P. T., Neumann, M., & Jones, L. C. (2004). Politics, school improvement, and social
justice: A triadic model of teacher leadership. The Educational Forum, 68(3), 254-262.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131720408984637
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from
two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255-316.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543074003255
Youngs, P., & King, M. B. (2002). Principal leadership for professional development to build
School capacity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(5), 643-670.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X02239642
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson P.

298 www.macrothink.org/ije
 International Journal of Education
ISSN 1948-5476
2012, Vol. 4, No. 4

Glossary
School Improvement: results of making the teaching and learning process and conditions
within schools better in order to support students in raising student achievement.
Teacher Leader: educators that work with fellow colleagues for the purpose of improving
teaching and learning, whether in a formal or an informal capacity
Appendix
Appendix 1. Teacher Leadership Roles Survey (TLRS)

Copyright Disclaimer
Copyright reserved by the author(s).
This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

299 www.macrothink.org/ije