How can collective efficacy be improved

One outcome associated with CTE is the effort and persistence of teachers in their classrooms. For example, Goddard et al. Tschannen-Moran and Barr furthered this argument by noting that, in schools where collective efficacy is high, teachers exhibit persistence and resiliency when working with students who are having difficulty. In addition, Bandura claims that, even when below-standard performance occurs, dissatisfaction with said performance plus a strong sense of collective efficacy will spur group productivity.

When collective efficacy is high, teachers are more willing to try new teaching approaches based on effective practice and more cooperative of change efforts Donohoo, Whereas low efficacious schools spend less time actively teaching, the opposite is true for schools where efficacy is high, and remediation for students who are struggling is meant to accelerate learning so that they can catch up to their peers Bandura, Tschannen-Moran and Barr also note that mastery instructional approaches are more often used in highly efficacious schools.

More mastery experiences in turn, according to Donohoo , build students with high academic efficacy. Schools that have high collective efficacy, in turn, have high expectations and standards for achievement and these permeate the school environment Bandura, In contrast, teachers who have a lower sense of efficacy set lower performance expectations Tschannen-Moran and Barr, and students who are already struggling will continue to do so if they are taught by teachers with weak efficacy beliefs Bandura, Donohoo asserts that the opposite is true as well, efficacious teachers set challenging and appropriate goals.

But, as Bandura contends, high standards will not accomplish much if they are not coupled with instruction and learning activities such as the mastery approaches alluded to in the previous section. Bandura asserts that efficacious schools distinguish themselves from lower efficacious schools through the structure of learning activities.

Schools with high CTE promote a sense of personal capability in all students. These schools generally favor mastery models of learning, monitor progress closely, and provide feedback and re-instruction for those who encounter difficulty p. Donohoo further states that high-collective efficacy schools value a student-centered teaching approach and encourage student autonomy, this in turn promotes intrinsic motivation of students p.

In schools that are efficacious, classroom management is a successful endeavor. This is achieved through promoting, recognizing, and praising desired behavior rather than punishing disruptive behavior Bandura, CTE influences how teachers collectively respond to misbehavior and staffs are more likely to persist in efforts to prevent and manage poor behavior. Furthermore, teachers are less discouraged and feel less stressed by temporary setbacks resulting for student misbehavior Donohoo, Klassen presented a similar finding and observed that collective efficacy mediated the effects of student behavior on job-related stress.

Furthermore, this commitment is significantly related to influence teachers have in decision making at the school level Donohoo, Devos et al.

As it relates to efficacy, increased commitment and willingness to exert effort on behalf of the organization is correlated with high levels of CTE Donohoo, While increased parental involvement creates greater risk and opens teachers to criticism Bandura, , Ross and Gray explain that a staff with greater CTE can overcome obstacles of this nature.

Sources and the effects of efficacy as discussed are well documented and supported in the research base, and it is not the intention of this article to challenge these ideas or their value to schools and education, although criticisms do exist. Just as the theory of action have been uncritically accepted, so too have the sources and effects of efficacy. However, this analysis is questioning the prevailing theory of action that expectations influence efforts, and efforts influence achievement Donohoo and Katz, The reason for this is that there appears to be a gap in the research resulting from a focus on sources of efficacy and effects and developing such.

Furthermore, while Ross et al. For example, Fig. Proposed model of the formation, influence, and change of perceived collective efficacy in schools Goddard et al. Figure 1 illustrates the development of CTE from the starting point of the four sources of efficacy without acknowledging how collective efficacy sources are employed in schools and how efficacy in turn is affected by and interacts with school processes.

This absence has led to the belief that schools should focus on efficacy building to improve schools instead of creating the structures known to be a factor in successful schools. The argument of this paper and proposed theory of action is that, by concentrating on school processes known to affect achievement, schools will increase achievement thus building collective efficacy that can then promote future improvement.

This argument differs from what is currently in the literature as it views CTE as a by-product or effect of successful school interactions rather than a precursor. The next section attempts to bridge the gap in the literature by presenting a new theoretical model of the development of collective efficacy in order to change the narrative that dominates the conversation of CTE and move the literature base forward by pushing school processes to the forefront of the conversation when considering the role of CTE on school improvement and achievement.

This proposed narrative of collective efficacy is based on findings from the CTE knowledge base as well as the general leadership and school improvement literature. The first assumption being made, as Leithwood et al. Second is that mastery experience in the form of prior achievement is a powerful source of efficacy Goddard, combined with a premise derived from Hallinger that, regardless of initial achievement, learning outcomes can be improved, and actually gain momentum, through changing key organizational processes.

In the sections that follow, an explanation of these school processes and their interactions with CTE is offered. According to Robinson , goal setting has a moderate impact on student learning and can reduce fragmentation and promote coherence. This aspect of leadership works indirectly by focusing the work of adults around promoting learning and achievement of students. In fact, Schmoker notes that there is not a single instance in the literature where student learning improved where it was not the central goal.

By itself, setting goals is not enough, the impact of goals is created by procuring acceptance of and commitment to the goals. This is accomplished through articulating the gap between current and desired performance and collective discussion and considering alternative opinions and possibilities Robinson, Following the establishment of goals, progress can be monitored and goal-based data can reveal progress that motivates and sustains efforts Schmoker, Fullan furthers this sentiment by claiming that short-term results are required to build confidence and gain the needed investment to move toward longer-term goals.

Goals are important to the discussion of CTE, and according to Schmoker , goals not only lead to success but also effectiveness and cohesion of a team. Cohesion and collective influence are likely to be higher in schools in which teachers share a common vision and goals about the directions of the school Ross et al. However, for goals to contribute to sources of efficacy, progress on goals needs to be monitored. When goals are monitored through such processes as team meetings to analyze student data and progress is found, this leads to mastery experiences and thus greater beliefs that more success can be attained, even if such experiences were not present before.

Mastery needs to be experienced prior to beliefs being developed in order for the collective beliefs to stimulate further progress. Ross et al. Furthermore, Escobedo suggests that teacher celebrations and student celebrations should have a positive effect of collective efficacy beliefs, with teacher celebrations having a slightly greater effect. Celebrations of this nature can include recognition of successes at staff meetings and sharing of student success at school-wide assemblies.

If the celebrations are meant to honor achievements, they should contribute to beliefs of mastery. Escobedo argued that school celebrations contributed to vicarious sources of efficacy by providing a similar model of success for other teachers in the school.

While this may be true, I would argue that success, even short-term results, is evidence of mastery and contributes to CTE as a source of mastery as well, even if every teacher did not experience success considering collective efficacy is an attribute based on whole-school perceptions. In sum, school leaders contribute to improved student outcomes by collaboratively setting school goals with teachers, monitoring and assessing goals often, and sharing and celebrating success.

Personal and behavioral forces include social norms about how people interact within the school context. Collective efficacy beliefs also emerge from the effects of mastery experiences and vicarious learning experiences, verbal persuasion and the emotional state of the organization. Mastery experiences have also been identified as the strongest predictor in developing collective efficacy beliefs Bandura, Mastery experiences at the organizational level can include the community developing goals and engaging in learning activities as a community to improve their teaching.

As the school experiences success in student outcomes, the organization believes that they can make a difference and this momentum continues. These successes build confidence and resiliency. Goddard et al. Further, individual teachers develop in-depth knowledge that they share with the community through vicarious experiences such as demonstration lessons.

In addition, school members may visit other effective schools to study their practices. School teams observe the successful practices of other teams and schools. In essence, this source is modeling effective practices. School members provide feedback and share ideas with one another as part of verbal persuasion. School leaders have the opportunity to provide descriptive feedback to teachers to increase their rate of learning. School leaders who focus on productive, appreciative feedback can create the conditions for teachers to grow professionally sharing knowledge and skills, and collectively commit to working together.

Activities such as book studies, workshops, professional development opportunities and feedback about achievement can inspire action. School members who have a strong sense of collective efficacy take on different roles to support the emotional state and value differences among each other, thereby decreasing the effects of stress, fear and anxiety by barriers. Safety and trust are essential ingredients for collective teacher efficacy and a healthy organizational culture.

Trust among teams can translate to members who respect and listen to one another, willingly share knowledge and ideas, and feel empowered and accepted within the team. In fact, mastery experience, vicarious experience and verbal persuasion all help to diminish anxiety and develop a higher collective sense of efficacy.

Further, a strong sense of efficacy allows the group to remain task oriented in the face of pressing demands or threats of failure. Schools act purposefully in pursuit of their educational goals, such as improving student achievement.

Another school may purposefully focus on improving teacher retention. These purposeful pursuits reflect the exercise of organizational agency Goddard, Working at this level enhances the potential for success, as schools share experiences, undertake shared inquiries and provide models and supports for each other.

Resources and self-assessment tools support the implementation, facilitation, connection and sharing practices of the network. Donohoo, J. The Learning Professional. Our website uses a free tool to translate into other languages. This tool is a guide and may not be accurate. When leaders ensure that dependable, high trust, collaborative structures are in place, teachers learn from and with one another and build common understandings.

Teachers need to see how collecting evidence fits into their daily routines, how they can use daily evidence to determine impact, and how they can make adjustments to their classroom practices when results aren't demonstrating increases in student outcomes. Building common conceptions of progress requires more than just the structures that increase forms of collaboration. Hargreaves and Fullan warn about "administrative contrivances" that become artificial and short-lived. In addition, the collective impact typically only occurs where there are high levels of social sensitivity among the group members.

Therefore, school leaders must foster empathy and effective interaction among teams. When leaders have a pulse on the emotional tone of the team, they can anticipate potential pitfalls that might occur during collaboration, sense when tensions rise, and not only have the fortitude to address the issues, but do so in a way that is respectful to the feelings and viewpoints of others.

Team members' confidence in each other's abilities and their belief in the impact of the team's work are key elements that set successful school teams apart.

Publicly seeking evidence of positive effects on student learning does not happen serendipitously or by accident and neither does a sense of psychological safety. School leaders must work to build a culture designed to increase collective teacher efficacy, which will affect teachers' behavior and student beliefs. The power and promise of collective efficacy is that it can be influenced within schools, so focusing on it as a change point is a viable path to greater student achievement, greater commitment to learning, and a more inviting place to come and learn.

The greatest power that principals have in schools is that they can control the narrative of the school. If the narrative is about bus timetables, tweaks in the curriculum, and test schedules, this percolates through the school as the purpose of schooling—compliance to procedures. In such schools, students think learning is coming to school on time, sitting up straight, keeping quiet, and watching the teacher work.

But if instead the narrative is about high expectations, growth in relation to inputs, what it means to be a "good learner" in various subjects, and what impact means, then teachers and students will think about learning in a different way. They will believe that learning is about challenge, about understanding and realizing high expectations, and that setbacks are an opportunity to learn.

Students will also believe that coming to school means investing energy in deliberate practice. Success lies in the critical nature of collaboration and the strength of believing that together, administrators, faculty, and students can accomplish great things. This is the power of collective efficacy. Adams, C. Proximate sources of collective teacher efficacy.

Journal of Educational Administration , 44 6 , — Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review , 84 2 , — Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.

Educational Psychologist , 28 2 , — Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. Freeman and Company. Cantrell, S. High and low implementers of content literacy instruction: Portraits of teacher efficacy.

Teaching and Teacher Education , 24 7 , — Eells, R. Meta-analysis of the relationship between collective efficacy and student achievement.