Schools serving disadvantaged communities (SSDCs) are often characterized by deficit thinking (Valencia, 1997) and as a result a lack of responsibility and dysfunctional relationships between teachers and students (Nelson & Guerra, 2014) that hinder improvement (Racherbäumer, 2017). Several studies show that to help their students succeed, SSDCs must change this culture (e.g., Gu & Johansson, 2013). The objective is to analyze how leadership can affect teachers’ beliefs about their students in a more management-oriented (USA) and a more professionalism-oriented (Germany) educational context. Hemmings (2012) argues that schools with a biography of unsuccessfulness must not only restructure, but also re-envision, reculture, and remoralize. Leaders must find ways to change attitudes and beliefs of teachers and help them experience self-efficacy. We draw on the model of Transformational Leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Transformational leaders aim at affecting the visions, goals, and beliefs of their staff through idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individualized support. In a multiple case study design, we conducted a teacher survey to assess leadership. We then conducted semi-standardized interviews with principals, teacher leaders, and district personnel, in which we asked the participants to reflect on school improvement retrospectively, and unstandardized observations of the principals. In the USA, we collected quantitative data from teachers in four schools serving disadvantaged communities. We conducted in-depth studies in three of these schools. In Germany, we collected quantitative data from sixteen schools. Qualitative data from four of these schools will be collected in 2019. The quantitative results from the USA showed that principals in successful schools were more actively engaged with the students, more visible in the school, and more supportive of a positive learning climate in the classrooms. The qualitative data showed that they used elements of TL to help their teachers experience self-efficacy, create a positive atmosphere, and convince them that their students deserved to be successful. For instance, the principals used indicators of success to keep up motivation, appealed to the emotional relationship between teachers and students, created a detailed system of individual support, and helped the teachers develop alternative views of their students through data. The data from Germany are currently being analyzed and the results will be reported at the meeting.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gu, Q., & Johansson, O. (2013). Sustaining School Performance. School Contexts Matter. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 16(3), 301-326. Hemmings, A. (2012). Four Rs for Urban High School Reform. Re-envisioning, Reculturation, Restructuring, and Remoralization. Improving Schools, 15(3), 198-210. Nelson, S. W., & Guerra, P. L. (2014). Educator Beliefs and Cultural Knowledge. Implications for School Improvement Efforts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(1), 67-95. Racherbäumer, K. (2017). Rekonstruktionen zu Bedeutung und Funktionen der Lehrer-Schüler-Beziehung aus Sicht von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern an Schulen in sozial benachteiligter Lage. In V. Manitius & P. Dobbelstein (Eds.), Schulentwicklungsarbeit in herausfordernden Lagen (pp. 123-139). Münster: Waxmann. Valencia, R. R. (1997). Conceptualizing the Notion of Deficit Thinking. In R. R. Valencia (Ed.), The Evolution of Deficit Thinking. Educational Thought and Practice (pp. 1-12). London: Falmer.