Making Visible Leadership Characteristics and Actions in Fostering Collective Teacher Efficacy: A Cross-Case Study

Abstract

Poverty can contribute to students’ struggles with academic success, yet these struggles may be mitigated in schools with high levels of collective teacher efficacy (CTE). The purpose of this study was to identify effective Title I-eligible schools, serving a high percentage of financially disadvantaged students, while also maintaining high levels of CTE. Two schools were selected for cross-case analysis to explore how leadership characteristics and actions nurtured and sustained schoolwide CTE. The methodology used in this study was a qualitative cross-case analysis. The researchers purposefully selected the schools as cases based on the level of CTE existing in the schools. The qualitative cases provided means of determining how CTE was nurtured and sustained in the exemplary schools. These findings have substantial significance for educational leaders at the school, district, university and state levels. The results identified element characteristics and actions of instructional leaders to actuate CTE, increased teacher confidence and more significant collaborative relationships in schools. This study supports existing CTE research regarding connections between CTE and shared leadership, and CTE and trust among faculty.

1. Introduction

Poverty is often associated with several family and student factors which can contribute to students’ struggles with academic success. For example, these students often experience higher rates of stress, anxiety and depression [1]. They are also more prone to apathy and disengagement in school due to the hardships associated with poverty [1]. As such, poverty’s impact on student learning has contributed to academic achievement gaps between students coming from affluent homes and those students who come from low socioeconomic homes [1,2]. Indeed, some national reports add that 22% of students who live in low-income families will not graduate from high school [3].

To help close the achievement gap, the Title I program of The Elementary Education Act (serving Kindergarten through Grade 6, ages 5–12) was developed by the United States federal government to provide extra support in the form of funding to schools that serve a high percentage of financially disadvantaged students [4]. However, even with the extra support, many students living in poverty continue to struggle to succeed in schools. Even though educational struggles persist for students from low-socioeconomic homes, collective teacher efficacy (CTE) research suggests some solutions. For example, CTE research has identified significant relationships between CTE and student achievement, even for students from low-socioeconomic homes [5].

2. Purpose of the Study and Research Questions

Strong evidence suggests that CTE is associated with increased student achievement [5]. Furthermore, some evidence suggests that leadership characteristics and actions may contribute to increased levels of CTE. However, little research has been conducted in high-achieving Title I schools that examine element characteristics and actions for fostering CTE [6]. The purpose of this cross-case study [7] is to explore CTE in high-performing Title I schools to identify potential leadership elements for increasing CTE. The research questions for this study are:

• What are the leadership characteristics of school principals in high-achieving Title I schools for developing and nurturing CTE?
• What are the leadership actions at high-achieving Title I schools for developing and nurturing CTE?

3. Review of the Literature

Poverty’s impact on student learning has contributed to academic achievement gaps between students coming from affluent homes and those students who come from low socioeconomic homes [1]. To help close the achievement gap, the Title I program was developed by the federal government to provide extra support in the form of funding to schools that serve 40% or more of the school student population who receive free or reduced lunch (FRL) benefits [4]. However, even with the extra support, many students living in poverty continue to struggle to succeed in schools. As such, Grant and Arnold stated that, “educational inequality has proven to be relatively impervious to current policy efforts to ameliorate it” [4] (p. 363). Even with the persistent educational impacts that students face from low-socioeconomic homes, collective teacher efficacy (CTE) research suggests a significant relationship between CTE and student achievement, even for students from low-socioeconomic homes [5].

3.1. Collective Teacher Efficacy

Bandura [8] described self-efficacy as the individual’s beliefs about their abilities to successfully plan and achieve a goal. Researchers extended the construct of efficacy to include collective efficacy, which relates to a group’s shared goals and how members of that group work together to achieve that goal [9]. Educational researchers then built upon Bandura’s notion of collective efficacy to examine collective efficacy at the school-wide level [9,10]. These researchers defined collective teacher efficacy (CTE) as the shared belief among teachers that they can reach even the most difficult students and help them learn [5]. Therefore, CTE is a whole school sociocultural construct that describes the school’s belief in successfully increasing student learning. We are using the term sociocultural from Vygotsky [11] because it refers to the social and cultural environment that influences a person’s experiences and perceptions. We believe that this construct adds to our understanding of the school environment that involves CTE.

Educational researchers suggest that teachers’ perceptions of their ability to help students has a greater influence on student achievement than socio-economic status (SES) [5,8,12,13]. Studies involving CTE have also looked at several areas that impact student learning and schools. For example, studies have looked at the relationship between school leadership theories and CTE showing a significant relationship between the two variables [14,15,16,17,18]. Additional studies have explored other variables related to school leadership such as school goal setting [19], academic press [20], and shared leadership [21], and found that all these concepts also have positive significant relationships with CTE.

School Leadership and CTE

School leadership also has some relationship with a school’s level of CTE and student achievement. Researchers have found that school principals may have a greater influence on student achievement than teachers [22]. CTE researchers also suggest that certain principal actions are associated with increased levels of CTE. For example, when principals provide shared leadership opportunities, teachers experience a higher sense of control. Both shared leadership and increased sense of control are associated with higher levels of CTE [14,23,24]. When principals help to establish a unified student learning focus, research suggests that this also increases CTE [8]. Principal support and effective communication by school principals are also associated with increased levels of CTE [17,23].

Additionally, CTE research indicates that CTE is associated with many favorable school outcomes. Some of these favorable outcomes include strong social networks and social capital [14,20,23,25]. Social networks and social capital also promote close, supportive relationships between teachers and are also associated with a positive school climate. Other favorable school factors associated with CTE include common goal-setting processes [8,20], strong classroom management [8], effective teacher professional development [14,21], and teacher collaboration [14,26].

School leadership has been shown to have a significant impact on student learning. Research suggests that principals have a similar effect as do teachers on student learning [22]. However, because the principal’s influence impacts every classroom in the school, an effective principal has potential to impact student learning across the entire school [22]. Some of the ways principals increase student learning is through developing systems and processes that support teacher collaboration, using student data meetings to improve instruction, developing effective relationships in schools, establishing common goal setting processes, and helping to develop teacher capacity through professional development and teacher observation and feedback [15,22,27]. Even though research suggests that principals have a significant influence on student learning, Grissom et al. [22] report that in high-poverty schools, principal influence is reduced due to higher turnover rates and lower levels of experience. Therefore, strong school leadership is needed especially in Title I schools.

Even though principal leadership is critical for student success, little research has been conducted to determine the connection between principal leadership and CTE. Calik et al. [14] examined principal actions that could serve as elements for increasing CTE, finding that several principal actions were associated with increased CTE. Some of those elements for CTE included nurturing strong supportive relationships, establishing a clear vision, providing professional development and providing structures for shared leadership. Additionally, Nordick et al. [23], using a cross-case analysis study of 24 school principals, reported that developing supportive relationships with teachers, providing teacher collaborative structures, and developing other methods for advancing teacher expertise were all elements for developing CTE.

Moreover, additional studies have indicated that CTE is associated with high levels of student achievement [5,9,13,19,28]. Researchers have demonstrated that CTE has significant effects on student achievement, over and above any effect of SES [5]. These reports suggest that principals should work in tandem with teachers to foster a sense of collective efficacy in which teachers hold a shared sense of responsibility for helping all students to achieve academic and personal success.

4. Materials and Methods

This study of two academically high-achieving Title I schools used a qualitative cross-case design to illustrate elements for developing and nurturing CTE. A qualitative cross-case [7] design allowed us to make visible particular elements of CTE through detailed analysis of a purposeful sampling. For purposes of this study, the theoretical constructs we explored were the relationships between educational leadership and CTE.

4.1. Participants

Two school cases were purposefully selected primarily based upon the school’s high level of CTE. The participants were selected based on being Title I schools who were in the top 25th percentile in the state for a combined language arts, mathematics, and science score. Once we had identified those schools, we emailed the principal and teachers the Collective Teacher Efficacy Scale [5] via a Qualtrics online survey link. The CTE scale was only used to identify the schools for purposeful selection of the cases. Therefore, we selected two schools who reported the highest level of CTE.

4.1.1. Case 1: Patzun Elementary School Participants

Patzun Elementary School (Grades K-6) is located in an urban neighborhood of a large U.S. city in the intermountain west. The school is considered a small school with only 273 students. In addition, the school has a high percentage (73%) of low-socioeconomic families, who qualified for free or reduced lunch (FRL) benefits. Patzun was a chosen as a case because it had the highest level of CTE out of all participating schools. The participants at Patzun (n = 18) consisted of the principal, assistant principal, and instructional staff (i.e., teachers and instructional coaches).

The participating teachers, staff members and principal at Patzun had a combined average of seven years teaching experience with approximately half of those participants having a bachelor’s degree and half earning a master’s degree. The principal at Patzun had a total of 13 years as an educator. He had taught for five years, worked as a new teacher consultant for one year, he was an administrative intern at Patzun for 2.5 years, an assistant principal at Patzun for 2.5 years and a principal at Patzun for 2 years. The principal had also earned a master’s degree.

4.1.2. Case 2: Escuintla Elementary School Participants

Escuintla Elementary School (Grades K-6), located in a rural agricultural area of the state, was the smallest participating school in this study with only 123 students. The school is a Title I school with a 61% FRL rate and employed one teacher per grade level. Escuintla was selected for the telling case study because of the high level of CTE and its high participation rate.

Participants (n = 4) included the school principal and three grade level teachers. The combined level of teaching experience for the principal and the participating teachers at Escuintla was eight years. Two of the participating teachers had master’s degrees and one teacher had a bachelor’s degree. The principal at Escuintla had a total of 21 years as an educator. She had taught for nine years. She had been a learning coach for eight years and had worked as the principal of Escuintla Elementary School for four years. She had also earned a master’s degree.

4.2. Materials

4.2.1. CTE Scale

CTE was measured using the CTE scale created by Goddard et al. [5]. This scale is a 21-item survey using a 6-point Likert scale. The responses range from 1, signifying “strongly disagree”, to 6, signifying “strongly agree”. A couple of examples of the items from the scale include: “Teachers in this school have what it takes to get the children to learn”, and “Teachers in this school are skilled in various methods of teaching”. The CTE scale was used only in terms of case selection.

4.2.2. Principal Semi-Structured Interview Protocol

This tool was developed using Goddard et al.’s [5] Collective Teacher Efficacy Scale, Balyer and Ozcan’s [29] Headmaster’s Transformational Scale, and Spradley’s [30] “grand tour” questions. The interview protocol guide also included some questions based on Bandura’s [31] four sources efficacy as it related to CTE. The protocol consisted of 27 semi-structured questions that focused on the strategies, attitudes, and behaviors of school leaders and teachers that helped to foster CTE. Some sample items included: What would I see and hear as I walk through your school? When students struggle with learning at this school, what do teachers do to help with student academic success? How do teachers work together to prepare themselves to be effective teachers? The semi-structured interview protocol helped us to foster a natural conversational flow during the interviews while keeping the interview focused on the sociocultural elements associated with CTE.

4.2.3. Teacher Semi-Structured Focus Group Protocol

The Teacher Semi-Structured Focus Group Protocol was nearly identical to the Principal Interview Protocol. However, some of the questions elicited teacher responses by changing one or two words to be more focused on the teachers in place of the school leader. A couple of examples from the teacher protocol are: When students struggle with learning at this school, what do teachers do to help with academic success? How do teachers at this school work together to prepare themselves to be effective teachers?

4.3. Procedures

First, we conducted virtual focus-group discussions with seven teachers from Patzun Elementary, using the Focus Group Protocol. The virtual focus-group discussions lasted approximately 90 min and were recorded via Google Meets. We then interviewed the principal from Patzun Elementary School, via Google Meets, using the semi-structured Principal Interview Protocol. The interview lasted approximately 60 min. We followed the same process with three teachers and the principal from Escuintla Elementary School.

4.4. Analysis

The data from the principal interviews and teacher focus group discussions were transcribed for analysis. First, we identified domain [30] elements related to our research questions relative to principal leadership characteristics and actions. We further conducted a taxonomic analysis [30] to find the relationships among the domain elements within each school. A further contrastive componential analysis [30] allowed us to contrast the cultural themes identified across the two schools. The researchers coded data separately and then combined efforts to establish intercoder agreement [32]. Where we did not have total agreement on elements within categories, we re-examined the data together to determine the better placement of the data. In addition, we remained open to adding new elements beyond the original designation of what counts as CTE.

5. Results

The qualitative analysis [30] allowed the researchers to identify several themes that were identified as elements of CTE. For research question one, we identified meaningful school leadership characteristics of each principal relative to fostering CTE. These leadership characteristics included the following subcategories: being open and vulnerable, being humble, being appreciative, and being supportive and helpful. Figure 1 illustrates all of the sociocultural elements we found regarding educational leadership that are potential elements for developing CTE.

5.1. Sociocultural Element: Leadership Characteristics

5.1.1. Characteristic: Being Open and Vulnerable

The characteristic of being open and vulnerable was only directly attributed to Patzun Elementary School’s principal. However, Escuintla’s principal and staff members did reference the importance of vulnerability and how it played a role in the school’s development of trust which is mentioned in more detail later in this article. In reference to Patzun’s principal, it is worth noting that being “open and vulnerable” were nearly always stated together as if these two characteristics represented a unifying trait. Following are several quotes that illustrate how Patzun’s staff members and principal defined openness and vulnerability. For example, one teacher stated:

When your leaders and your mentors are honest, vulnerable and open, and they share their concerns with you, it [produces] this umbrella effect, an overarching effect that if they’re going to be open with you, you feel safe to be open with them. And I think that [creates] a culture of mutual respect. And we’re all in this together…we’re all trying to meet the same goals. It helps us to just follow [our] leader.

This teacher suggested that by being vulnerable and open, the principal was willing to share his concerns with the teachers. Furthermore, the data suggests that the principal was willing to share his weaknesses and did not attempt to portray the image of being perfect. These characteristics reportedly had the effect of building a safe and collaborative culture.

The assistant principal added additional detail regarding the ways in which leadership at Patzun were open and vulnerable. He stated,

We don’t ever like to propose things and then not do it ourselves…I [model] a mindfulness lesson for about five minutes in faculty meetings with the teachers because it’s not fair that I’m preaching it and then not practicing it.

This statement suggests that an element of being open and vulnerable is a willingness from the assistant principal to model and try things that are uncomfortable and new. By being vulnerable in this way, the school leadership contributed to the development of CTE.

Another illustrative example of being open and vulnerable was shared by Patzun’s principal. When speaking about vulnerability, he said,

Vulnerability, trust, being honest and open, I think these are critical pieces to our sustainability…I was on a teaching team that had these four things and we were able to talk honestly about data and truly converse about improving student outcomes because we were not so busy hiding behind the data…I feel that’s been the heart of [our success]. It’s the coaching model and the data-focused culture that has created a safe space where we’re focused on being better educators to support our kids. We’re not hiding…we’re not [avoiding] talking about data.

This quote from the principal broadens the understanding of openness and vulnerability. The principal described his own experience of being vulnerable with student achievement data and his willingness to overcome natural tendencies to hide potential flaws to focus on student outcomes. The principal’s openness and vulnerability set an example for his staff members to remove barriers that are often associated with fear and self-preservation to support teacher growth, student success and increased levels of CTE.

5.1.2. Characteristic: Being Humble

Escuintla Elementary school’s principal was perceived as being humble. As an example of the school principal’s humility, Escuintla’s principal, when receiving praise for the school success, said, “I don’t want to take credit…I can’t take credit for all of it…It’s a team effort anyway”. The principal was hesitant to take the credit. She wanted to make sure that her teachers and other staff members were recognized for their efforts and successes. Another statement from the principal that helps us to develop a better understanding of the school principal’s humility is seen here. She said, “No one is above anyone else…I think everybody’s on the same playing field [at our school]”. One additional quote that reflects the principal’s humility is seen in this quote from the principal regarding power and influence:

I didn’t go into this position because I love power. That’s not my personality… It’s not really important for me to have the power, or have the final say. I think it’s important to get opinions from everyone and have that discussion. [I look for] a team effort in making decisions and talking out ideas.

These statements suggest that the principal does not see herself as being more important than her teachers and staff members. The principal’s humble stance helps to establish the relationships that nurture CTE.

5.1.3. Characteristic: Being Appreciative

Similar to the attribute of humility, Escuintla’s principal also was characterized as being appreciative. Regarding this principal characteristic, one teacher stated, “We will come in and have a random written note on our desk, or an email saying how much she appreciates us. She just notices the things that we do”. Another teacher remarked that, “…our principal always starts our faculty meetings with successes or celebrations”. The teachers developed a strong trusting relationship with their principal through her thoughtfulness and her humility.

5.1.4. Characteristic: Being Supportive & Helpful

Escuintla Elementary School’s principal was described as being supportive and helpful. This was such a meaningful characteristic that the principal stated, “[Being helpful] is part of my vision, I find ways to fill the needs of the school”. She went on to explain how her typical day was filled with ways that she could be helpful and supportive to her teachers. She said,

Monday through Thursday from 10:00–10:30, I tradeoff between second or third grade…We do Read Naturally with kids for that half hour of time…Then I go in the lunchroom. I help with lunch. Most days I end up on the playground helping with recess duty because then there’s two eyes on the playground instead of one. Yesterday, I was the librarian. Our librarian was absent, so I went and read stories to our kindergarten and second grade.

Escuintla teachers also reported the principal’s helpfulness and support. One teacher expressed the support from her principal by stating,

It really helps for your administration to be positive and more of a support then a critical person…When I was so lucky to get a job here, I immediately felt comfortable. Everybody made me feel really welcome. A big part of that was our principal…We know she has our backs. She’s in our corner. We know that 100%.

Another teacher said, “We hear, ‘How can I help you?’ a lot. ‘Thank you for…’, we hear that all of the time”. These characteristics set an example for the teachers and staff members and were exemplified by others throughout the school. In this way, the principal characteristics at both schools helped to establish a school wide culture of shared support, high belief in student success, and collective teacher efficacy.

5.2. Sociocultural Element: Leadership Actions

For research question two, we noted the following identified leadership actions: shared leadership, leader visibility, effective communication, focusing on student learning, building trust, and mentoring teachers.

5.2.1. Action: Shared Leadership

Both Patzun’s and Escuintla’s principals focus on shared leadership actions. At Patzun Elementary, the principal established many ways for teachers to participate in shared-leadership processes. They participated in school committees that focused on school-wide behavior management, or on identifying effective instructional practices. In these committee meetings, the teachers planned meeting agendas and followed up on professional development and school trainings in these areas. Similarly, the school teacher collaboration meetings were facilitated and planned by teachers. The following quotes provide additional insight into these teacher leadership opportunities. Patzun’s principal stated,

We have committee meetings where teachers have an opportunity to develop leadership…and then individuals are able to facilitate those meetings…Everybody on the faculty…determines who will be representatives for each of these committees. I allow them to decide which [committee] is going to be of most benefit to them.

Regarding shared leadership, Patzun’s principal also said the following regarding teacher collaboration meetings, “Because we have two teachers in each grade level…one of the teachers is responsible for developing the agenda for one subject and then the other teacher is responsible for developing the agenda for the other”.

Escuintla Elementary school’s principal also found ways for teachers to develop leadership. This was done primarily through communication processes that allowed teachers and staff to influence school-wide decisions. Escuintla’s principal said the following regarding shared leadership:

I’ve worked in a school before where it was…like a dictatorship…People are unhappy with decisions being made [with] no input from others…I remember at that point thinking, ‘This is kind of taking the joy away from the job’. And, so I’ve always tried to keep in mind the teachers’ perspective…So, a lot of times I ask for input when making decisions…If possible, I try to involve teachers, or aides, or whoever…I try and involve them in the decision-making process…I think you get a lot more buy-in when you have ownership from others.

Teachers at Escuintla appreciated the opportunity to discuss school decisions collectively. In fact, one teacher said, “We are successful because everybody has input.” These teacher leadership opportunities help to develop teacher capacity, teacher engagement in school improvement initiatives and potentially increase CTE.

5.2.2. Action: Leader Visibility in School and in Community

Similar to shared leadership, both school principals intentionally made time to be visible in their schools and communities. At Patzun, the school principal emphasized being in classrooms with teachers often. He said, “We make it a conscience effort to be in every classroom every two weeks”. Not only does the consistent classroom visits build a stronger relationship with teachers, it also helps to emphasize the importance of classroom instruction. The assistant principal also emphasized being visible in the community. He explained how he did regular home visits to help to improve attendance:

We do a lot of home visits. If we don’t see [students] in two days, you can pretty much expect me and our counselor to be knocking at [their] door and just checking up on [them]…We’re a neighborhood school so we usually just put on our coats and we’ll walk to the house…We do a lot of home visits for tardies and absences…We’ll say hey if you want, we can wait 10 to 15 min while you get [your child] ready and we’ll take them to school.

This visibility in the community also helped parents to understand the importance of school attendance and it allowed the community to see and get to know the school leaders. It helped parents to develop a relationship with the school leaders.

Escuintla’s principal likewise spent significant time in the classroom. However, she also spent equal amounts of time in the cafeteria, the library, the playground and on buses. An Escuintla teacher said the following in regard to her principal:

One thing I love about [our principal] is she always puts herself in the classroom…If we need a substitute teacher [she’s] in the classroom. If somebody’s gone…and we need someone to fill in she jumps in. She is constantly keeping herself in the classroom so she doesn’t forget what it’s like to be a classroom teacher. That makes a big difference for us as teachers knowing that she’s willing to do that.

• Escuintla’s principal added,

I went into education for the kids and that’s why I’m here. It’s not because I wanted to have a desk job and sit behind a computer…I try to keep relevant and keep connected to the kids and the staff.

• For Escuintla’s principal, being visible allows her to build relationships and to have an ongoing pulse of the school’s happenings.

5.2.3. Action: Effective Communication

Patzun’s principal and staff members gave significant emphasis on their principal’s effective communication. At Patzun, this communication was focused, structured and formal. Patzun’s principal was highly organized and used structured communication processes including weekly information emails, and meeting agendas with clearly stated objectives as part of his communication processes. In communicating expectations, Patzun’s principal said, “It’s important to be clear and explicit about expectations…Clarity of expectations and a concrete timeline…some people benefit from that…I try to work for clarity…articulating things clearly…regular clear communication is huge”. The principal continued stating, “Our committees have meeting norms…[I] remind us of those norms when we’re deviating…We determine what commitments we have and we stick to those. We make sure that we’re fulfilling said commitments”.

Similarly, at Escuintla, effective communication was emphasized as being a meaningful element for nurturing CTE. However, this sociocultural element was attributed more to the smallness and layout of their school then directly attributed to formal communication processes. As such, Escuintla’s communication was informal and frequent due the smallness of the school building. Teachers, staff members and the principal would see each other every day in passing and would use these natural informal meetings to improve student learning and instruction.

The principal described the ease of communicating in a small school by saying, “In the mornings I’ll just run down [the hall] and ask questions…because in a small school building you can walk right out your door. You can hear if somebody’s having a problem. There is only one hallway”. This method of communication at Escuintla was less formal than Patzun’s communication processes. However, because the teachers and staff members were so focused on supporting student learning, the frequent informal communication seemed to be very responsive to student needs.

In terms of meeting students’ needs with the frequent informal communication Escuintla’s principal stated,

Passing down the hall, or in the library [it’s easy to address student needs]…The library is where most of our teachers’ aides run groups. And so, you come in here and you can catch four to five different aides and have that conversation if needed.

Patzun’s informal and frequently communication was effective because the school principal helped to build a student-learning focus that gave structure and meaning to the informal conversations.

5.2.4. Action: Student-Learning Focus

Both schools exhibited a student-learning focus. With Patzun, that focus was predominantly associated with the principal and his systems and processes. Patzun’s principal established clear processes for reviewing data and clear regular processes for developing learning interventions based on the student learning data. The regular and consistent processes at Patzun helped the teachers to feel comfortable and confident while using student learning data to make instructional adjustments.

One teacher expressed her thoughts regarding these processes by saying, “I’m always looking at [student data] and asking, ‘why is this kid on yellow?’…I’ll bring that student’s name to the forefront. I’ll say why did this student fall back so bad? And then we create a plan”. In this teacher quote, being on yellow referred to a student’s reading level being slightly below the target reading benchmark level. Therefore, this quote reflects the teacher’s use of data to provide an intervention for the struggling student. Similarly, the assistant principal added, “It’s been really cool to see that we’re not scared to talk about data. Data is always in the forefront…We talk about who we are going to push to be proficient”. The focus on student learning has helped the teachers at Patzun to increase in CTE.

At Escuintla, the student-learning focus was also centered on using student learning data and developing appropriate student learning interventions. Escuintla’s principal emphasized the student-learning focus when she said, “[There’s a] passion to teach kids…Every minute counts. In other words, we’re here to learn and we’ve got to get focused. We’re very committed to student learning”. The teachers echoed this focus. One teacher mentioned, “We meet [to review] reading groups [and ask ourselves], ‘Who do we need to adjust? Who’s not making progress?’”. Both school principals supported the use of student learning data to adjust instruction. This focus was a primary sociocultural element for increasing CTE.

5.2.5. Action: Building Trust

Patzun’s principal also had intentional actions and processes that built trust. This sociocultural element supported unified strong relationships that contributed to high levels of CTE and social capital. He worked on building trust through being accessible to teacher and staff, taking time to get to know his staff members, modeling competence, celebrating teachers and extending trust to his teachers and belief in his teachers and staff. In regard to being accessible, one teacher explained, “We feel like we can go to [the principal] and just talk to him”. Being accessible not only meant that the principal was available. It also meant that the principal was accessible by being willing to give teachers time, interest and attention.

The principal strengthened relationships by getting to know his staff members well. He said, “I intentionally get to know the teachers and know what is the best way that they feel supported”. At Patzun, relationships of trust also were built through the modeling of competence by the principal and the assistant principal. These school leaders understood the importance of having the knowledge and expertise to support teachers. The principal emphasized this by saying, “[Teachers] rely on us a lot to help with behaviors and academics”. Celebrating teachers’ and staff members’ successes and giving them praise increased the element of trust. Teacher recognition occurred frequently at Patzun. Regarding teacher praise, the principal stated, “We [find] regular ways of celebrating teachers. We celebrate teachers at weekly assemblies. We celebrate teachers in my weekly messages. I always celebrate staff members for the work they’re doing…so they feel listened to, responded to, trusted”.

Additionally, relationships of trust were built when Patzun’s principal demonstrated confidence in his teachers—when he extended trust to them. One of Patzun’s teacher expressed appreciation for his principal’s trust in this way,

When we’re doing what we’re supposed to do, you need the trust from the admin that we will do it. Admin will still check in with us. We’re still accountable. But, we’re not constantly looking over our shoulders wondering if [the principal] is going to attack us. That’s why I can go to [our principal] and ask him [anything] without fear of what’s going to happen to me. And that makes a better environment for everyone.

• The principal reiterated the importance of this trust when he said,

Teachers are not being micromanaged. They’re being trusted to use their professional judgement…within reason. We do have vertical alignment. We need to be using the curriculum. We use the pacing [guides]. We need to adhere to basic foundational structures so we’re not getting off track. But [allowing] autonomy and latitude…and trusting their judgement supports teachers in complexity… Sometimes we need multiple minds to problem solve…We realize that [education] has complex problems [needing] complex solutions.

• The principal realized the importance of trusting his teachers and allowing them the freedom of making choices. This trust helped the teachers to gain confidence.

At Escuintla, trust was not explicitly mentioned as a principal action. However, the principal had substantial influence over the development of trust among her teachers and staff members. As mentioned earlier in this article, at Escuintla, trust was often described in association with vulnerability. A teacher described this association in this way,

I feel like we can be vulnerable. I can share weaknesses or problems that I have without being nervous…The aide or somebody will walk in my classroom and I’ll say, ‘I could use some help with these manipulatives.’ I had an aide say, ‘Well, have you thought of this?’ I loved that she…would feel comfortable giving me advice…I feel [safe asking questions and getting advice] when it comes to our faculty meetings and we share successes and concerns…It’s so nice to be able to be vulnerable and ask for help without feeling belittled.

• Another teacher included the following regarding the safe trusting feelings that were had among staff member:

When we’re done [with interventions], I ask the aides, ‘How did that go?’ ‘Did you like [the intervention]?’ ‘Did the students like it?’…So, I just open up to them letting them know I care about what they think…We’re just being vulnerable with each other.

• These statements suggest that the teachers feel safe and trust being vulnerable with others through asking others’ opinions. At Escuintla trust is seen in valuing others’ abilities and skills, or simply by trusting others.

5.2.6. Action: Mentoring Teachers

An additional principal action we noted in the data was that of mentoring teachers. Patzun’s principal established or supported several teacher mentoring processes. Some of the ways teachers were mentored included one-on-one coaching by instructional coaches, district coaches and grade level peers. These coaches helped new teachers to gain an understanding and expertise with the school’s teacher collaboration meeting processes, with school behavior management processes and with teacher development processes. Career teachers also receive mentoring through the principal’s observation and feedback processes and through the peer observation process. Relative to this support, one teacher commented, “The instructional level is very high here…it’s because of the [administration] and the support we get from them. Coaches and admin come in and give us feedback to help us grow”. These teacher mentoring processes helped to increase teacher expertise which in turn increased their level of CTE.

With this sociocultural element, we did not encounter much descriptive information for Escuintla Elementary. However, reference to meaningful learning for the school adults was identified. The principal had many classroom visits every day to model and support teacher development. The principal also described how her teachers had a desire to learn. She described that one of the more recent professional developments in her building was for kindergarten through second grade teachers to learn more about early literacy. However, every teacher in her school, even those not required to participate, decided to learn about the early literacy instruction to better support student learning. The principal reflected on her staff members’ desire to learn by stating, “I think there’s genuinely a desire to learn here. The teachers crave it. They want to be better. They want to learn which you don’t get everywhere”.

This focus on learning is structured and directed by the principal. In this way she mentored her teachers. These many principal characteristics and actions helped these two exceptional schools and their teachers to succeed while they worked with students who may otherwise be placed at risk for retention due to being low income or second-language students. The listed sociocultural elements of principal characteristics and actions are potential elements for increasing and nurturing CTE.

6. Discussion

This qualitative cross-case study of two elementary schools provides meaningful and rich insights regarding principal actions and characteristics that foster CTE in Title I-eligible schools. This study confirms existing research conducted by Nordick et al. [23] regarding the far-reaching influence and significance of school principals. It also extends prior research because we conducted this study in high-ranking Title I schools [12,16,19]. Particularly, this study provides educational leaders and principals with specific examples and actions that they can take to build strong school sociocultural contexts that are based on collective teacher efficacy. As such, these cultural elements should be used to help school leaders to strengthen CTE. Furthermore, these avenues for CTE should become part of the curriculum for university coursework related to Teacher Education and School Leadership.

This study also provides researchers with various potential elements for developing CTE in all schools. Some of the sociocultural elements that have the greatest potential as CTE elements are those elements that were seen in both schools. Specifically, vulnerability, shared leadership, leader visibility, effective communication, a student-learning focus, building trust, and mentoring teachers are meaningful concepts for future CTE research. Furthermore, it is helpful to review how this study has made these substantial elements visible for school leaders.

As to vulnerability, this study suggests that school leaders should be willing to model the skills they ask teachers to develop. Leaders also should be willing to embrace the concept of growth through trial and error, they should help teachers to feel comfortable using student learning data, and they should value effort and growth over the appearance of perfection when fostering vulnerability. With shared leadership, leaders should identify specific opportunities for teachers to lead out in collaborative meetings, and to help develop meeting agendas, instructional school practices and to help establish school wide goals. Principals should be visible throughout their schools and in the community to develop strong relationships.

For effective communication, school leaders should develop clear expectations and systems for communicating those expectations. Developing a student-learning focus through the use of student learning data to guide instruction and to develop learning interventions is important to strengthen CTE. Leaders wanting to increase CTE should build strong relationships through extending trust and some autonomy to their teachers. Trust can also be developed when principals show that they are competent, helpful and knowledgeable. Finally, mentoring teachers through observation and feedback, and by providing meaningful professional development experiences will also increase CTE.

For future research, it would be important to conduct ethnographic studies that follow schools with high levels of CTE throughout the school year to better understand how CTE is developed over time. Ethnographic studies that provide rich descriptions of teacher collaboration meetings and professional learning communities (PLCs) in high-CTE schools would also be valuable to gain more in-depth descriptions of the relationships that exist in high-CTE schools. Another area of future research could look at the statistical relationship between PLCs and CTE. This research should be conducted in middle and secondary level schools who demonstrate high CTE to explore their leadership characteristics and actions. Another area of research could be evaluation research related to the capacity of the leadership in relation to these specified characteristics and actions.

Regarding the ever-changing political landscape surrounding public education, and program funding, and given that these authors worked closely with participants in Title I schools, we understand the critical nature of the U.S. Government Federal funding that supports these schools. We would strongly recommend that educational leaders consider the importance of this funding to continue to help develop Title I schools with high levels of CTE.

7. Conclusions

7.1. Limitations

One of the limitations of this study is the researchers’ own bias and positionality. All of the article authors have worked as educators and/or school leaders in Title I schools. We acknowledge that our personal experiences may have influenced the results through personal bias. However, our expertise also may have helped us to have additional insight regarding the school processes and may have helped us to develop rapport with study participants. Additionally, this study implemented member-checking and peer review processes to increase reliability. Another limitation of this study was the use of only two cases. Additional cases might have strengthened the cross-case findings. As such, there may be other meaningful sociocultural elements that were not found nor reported in this study that could be reported from future research.

7.2. Educational Importance

As mentioned previously, CTE is a school’s collective belief that the teaching staff can successfully teach all students. CTE is also associated with increased student achievement, teacher wellbeing, and strong social networks that encourage collaboration and support. This study strengthens the evidence that suggests that CTE can bring about these favorable school conditions even in Title I schools that serve high numbers of low-income students. As such, educators can apply the findings from this study to make social and academic improvements in all schools. The results of this study provide elements for school leaders to apply in school settings in an effort to nurture and sustain CTE. The results also provide many CTE elements for researchers to apply in future CTE research. As such, this study holds importance for both educational leaders and to researchers.