Trust is a precondition for social relationships (Luhmann, 1968). According to Bourdieu (1983) it may be understood as a common resource, as “social capital”. In education, trust has always been an important concept as it is seen as an essential element of educational interaction (Bartmann, Pfaff & Welter, 2012). However, this has not been always reflected by adequate conceptualisation. For Tschannen-Moran & Hoy (1998), trust is a vital element in a well-functioning school and the basis for constructive communication and collaboration, and, as a consequence, for the effects of schooling. Bryk & Schneider (2002) conceptualise trust as a core resource in processes of school development. A range of studies (e.g. Bryk et al., 2010; Louis, 2007) indicate that trust affects the scope of possible development initiatives. Eventually, it seems to be easier to focus on essential tasks and to work efficiently in an environment characterized by trust.

As a consequence of the startling results of the international student assessment studies education policy in the German speaking countries followed an international trend of professionalizing the school system and of introducing new evidence-based governance regimes (Altrichter & Maag Merki, 2010). This new logic of governance increased accountability demands on schools which might erode trust between individual schools and education policy/administration (O’Neill, 2013; Bormann, 2012).

In fact, accountability pressure is conceptualised as an important stimulus of school development in a range of governance systems and in theories of school improvement (e.g. Reezigt & Creemers, 2005). Altrichter & Kemethofer (2014) showed that school leaders in ‘high stake systems’ say that more activities of school development take place in their schools. However, they also point to the fact that school development is also happening in ‘low stake systems’ and that accountability pressure also produces unintended and detrimental side-effects. Elstad, Christophersen & Turmo (2012) found that teachers in school systems with low pressure and high trust acted more constructively in development processes.

In schools we may distinguish various potential reference groups and institutions to all of which social relationships may be more or less trustful: students, teachers, school leaders, stake holders, school inspection, local and central administration etc. The proposed paper focusses on the role of trust as a possible driving element for quality development in the context of ‘new school inspections’. Ozga et al. (2013) highlight the role of trust between the inspectorate and the school as a key element for the implementation of long-term development goals. Leeuw (2002) assumes that trust-based relationships between schools and the inspectorate stimulate a more open attitude towards one’s own strengths and weaknesses which may be conducive for accepting the recommendations of the inspectorate and putting them into practice.

The paper discusses the possible meanings of trust for school development and presents an operationalization of trust. Additionally we will present first empirical results in order to assess the potential of the concept and its operationalization. In doing so we will discuss the following questions:

• What is the role of trust in processes of quality development in schools?
• Is trust a conducive condition for school development in the context of school inspection?
• Is there more or less school development in schools which are characterised by a high level of in-school trust?

Altrichter, H., & Maag Merki, K. (eds.) (2010). Handbuch Neue Steuerung im Schulsystem. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Altrichter, H., & Kemethofer, D. (2014). Does Accountability Pressure through School Inspections Promote School Improvement? School Effectiveness and School Improvement (submitted). Bartmann, S., Pfaff, N., & Welter, N. (2012). Vertrauen in der erziehungswissenschaftlichen Forschung. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 58(6), 772-783. Bormann, I. (2012). Vertrauen in Institutionen der Bildung oder: Vertrauen ist gut – ist Evidenz besser? Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 58(6), 812-823. Bourdieu, P. (1983). Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital. In R. Kreckel (Hrsg.), Soziale Ungleichheiten (S. 183-198). Göttingen: Verlag Otto Schwertz & Co. Bryk, A.S., Bender Sebring, P., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J.Q. (2010). Organizing Schools for Improvement. Lessons from Chicago. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago. Bryk, A.S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in Schools: A Core Resource of Improvement. New York: Russel Sage Foundation. Ehren, M.C.M., & Visscher, A.J. (2006). Towords a Theory on the Impact of School Inspections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54(1), 51-72. Ehren, M.C.M., Altrichter, H., McNamara, G., & O’Hara, J. (2013). Impact of school inspections on improvement of schools – describing assumptions on causal mechanisms in six European countries. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 25(1), 3-43. Elstad, E., Christophersen, K.-A., & Turmo, A. (2012). The strength of accountability and teachers‘ organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(5), 612-628. Gustafsson, J.-E., Ehren, M.C.M., Conyngham, G., McNamara, G., Altrichter, H., & O’Hara, J. (under review). School inspections and school improvement: testing assumptions on causal mechanisms. Kemethofer, D., & Altrichter, H. (in prep.). Vertrauen in Schulentwicklungsprozessen. Leeuw, F.L. (2002). Reciprocity and Educational Evaluations by European Inspectorates: Assumptions and reality checks. Quality in Higher Education, 8(2), 137-149. Louis, K.S. (2007). Trust and improvement in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 8(1), 1-24. Luhmann, N. (1968). Vertrauen. Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag. O’Neill, O. (2013). Intelligent accountability in education. Oxford Review of Education, 39(1), 4-16. Ozga, J., Baxter, J., Clarke, J., Grek, S., & Lawn, M. (2013). The Politics of Educational Change: Governance and School Inspection in England and Scotland. Swiss Journal of Sociology, 39(2), 205-224. Reezigt, G.J., & Creemers, B.P.M. (2005). A comprehensive framework for effective school improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(4), 407-424. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. (1998). Trust in schools: a conceptual and empirical analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(4), 334-352.