Objectives

The search for characteristics of teachers that affect student performance has led to an increased interest in teachers' academic optimism. Research has shown that teachers' academic optimism has a strong positive effect on student performance, regardless of students’ socioeconomic or migration background (Ates & Unal, 2021; Beard et al., 2010). Teachers' academic optimism, as described by Woolfolk Hoy et al. (2008) includes the interplay between teachers’ self-efficacy, teachers’ trust in students, and teachers’ academic emphasis. These elements interact and reinforce each other, forming a coherent trait that varies across teachers. Importantly, academic optimism is a developable trait (Hong, 2017), suggesting that fostering this quality in teachers improves educational outcomes for diverse student populations.

Much of what happens in schools can be understood through the organizational values upheld by staff members (Hoy, 2012; Hoy & Miskel, 2012). Organizational values—such as result orientation and cohesion—reflect shared ideals among staff and contribute to a school's unique cultural identity. These values are a component of the organizational culture and help explain how teachers perceive and shape themselves and their environment (Hargreaves, 1995; Schein, 2010). Based on this, we hypothesize that teachers' academic optimism is influenced by their perception of the cultural organizational values within their school. School culture, and particularly its values component, is often operationalized using the competing values framework (Cameron & Quinn, 2008; Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983). This model integrates both an internal and external organizational focus, as well as a focus on flexibility versus control (Quinn, 2003). To date, it remains unclear which organizational values in schools are positively or negatively associated with individual teachers' academic optimism.

A similar argument applies to school leadership. Principals can influence cultural changes within a school, both consciously and unconsciously (Cameron & Quinn, 2008; Döş & Savaş, 2015; Maslowski, 2001; Supovitz et al., 2010; Valentine et al., 2006). Research shows that school leaders significantly impact academic optimism (McGuigan & Hoy, 2006). Positive relationships exist between shared leadership and teachers' academic optimism (Chang, 2011; Mascall et al., 2008; Thien & Chan, 2020), as well as between authentic and transformational leadership and teachers' academic optimism (Hong, 2017; Srivastava & Dhar, 2016). However, these previous studies each examined specific leadership styles separately. Integrated studies on different leadership approaches in relation to academic optimism are lacking. Additionally, the specific influence of instructional leadership (Robinson, 2010) and the impact of performance management-inspired leadership on academic optimism in classrooms remain unexplored (Aguinis & Pierce, 2008).

This study therefore aims to investigate how perceptions of diverse school leadership perspectives and school culture influence teachers' academic optimism in the classroom. Given that school leaders play a pivotal role in shaping school culture, we hypothesize that the impact of school leadership operates, at least partially, through aspects of school culture. Therefore, this study seeks to empirically determine whether different forms of school leadership directly affect academic optimism or if this influence also operates indirectly through school culture. Based on these considerations, the study addresses the following central research questions: (1) To what extent do aspects of school culture impact teachers' academic optimism? (2) To what extent do instructional leadership, shared leadership, authentic leadership, and performance management impact teachers' academic optimism? And (3) to what extent is the effect of school leadership on teachers' academic optimism mediated by school culture?

We report on an online survey regarding teachers' perceptions of the aforementioned variables. Based on survey data, we test the existence and strength of the relationships in the conceptual framework. The data collection took place in Antwerp, the most populous city in Flanders, Belgium, known for its wide range of secondary schools with diverse ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds. Using a stratified clustered systematic sampling approach, the study involved the participation of 1061 teachers across 37 secondary schools. To measure teachers' academic optimism, the 'adapted Survey for Academic Optimism (aSAO)' was used (Lelieur et al., 2022). Teachers rated their agreement with statements about their students using a seven-point response scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (7). For assessing school culture, the 'School Culture Inventory' (Maslowski, 2001) measured perceptions of how important certain values were within the school. Responses were given on a five-point response scale ranging from “not important” (1) to “very important” (5), reflecting respondents' perceptions rather than an exact representation of the school's actual culture. Teachers' perceptions of instructional leadership were based on Robinson et al.’s (2009) research. Shared leadership was operationalized using a measure of policy-making capacity in schools (Van Gasse et al., 2016). Items for authentic leadership were adapted from Srivastava & Dhar (2016). To measure performance management for academic optimism, we developed a new scale applying performance management principles to academic optimism. The school leadership items were rated by teachers on the same seven-point response scale as the items for academic optimism. Prior to the main study for this research, pilot tests and exploratory factor analyses were carried out to validate the scales used. Table 1 presents their internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha values ranging from .74 to .87, along with the number of items and a sample item for each scale. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), we investigated whether the presumed theoretical relationships correspond with the empirical data (Kline, 2005). A SEM analysis allows for the integration of a measurement model and a structural model. This creates the possibility to test theoretical models as a whole rather than as separate components. The level of analysis was the individual teacher. To account for the nested structure of the dataset, we used a robust maximum likelihood estimation (MLR) in estimating the SEM model (Stapleton et al., 2016). Several fit indices were considered to test model fit (Hooper et al., 2008).

A path model was employed to examine the relationship between school leadership, school culture, and academic optimism. The model demonstrated a good fit with the data (RMSEA = 0.043; CFI = 0.94). Regarding school culture, the study found that perspectives with an external focus – the rational goal perspective and open system perspective – positively correlate with teachers’ academic optimism. Conversely, perspectives with an internal focus – the internal process perspective and human relations perspective – negatively affect academic optimism. What concerns school leadership, the study found that instructional leadership and performance management for academic optimism positively influenced teachers’ self-efficacy and academic emphasis. These leadership styles, which include articulating a vision for learning, setting ambitious goals, supporting teacher development, and providing observation and feedback, were found to have a direct impact on teachers’ self-efficacy. However, the effects on other subcomponents of academic optimism were only indirect. Authentic leadership, characterized by genuine relationships with teachers and valuing their contributions, had a limited positive impact on trust in students. In contrast, shared leadership negatively impacted teachers’ self-efficacy and academic emphasis. Our findings imply that school culture partially mediates the relationship between school leadership and teachers’ academic optimism. This means that school leadership influences school culture, which in turn influences teachers’ academic optimism. Thus – beside the direct effect – school leaders also indirectly influence teachers’ academic optimism by shaping the school culture. These findings carry important implications for educational policy and practice. They suggest that school leaders can enhance teachers’ academic optimism by prioritizing instructional leadership and performance management for academic optimism. Additionally, school leaders can indirectly influence teachers’ academic optimism by shaping the school culture. More detailed results and consequences, as well as limitations, will be covered in the presentation.

Aguinis, H., Joo, H., & Gottfredson, R. K. (2011). Why we hate performance management-And why we should love it. In Business Horizons (Vol. 54, Issue 6, pp. 503–507). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.06.001 Beard, K. S., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy Anita, A. (2010). Academic optimism of individual teachers: Confirming a new construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(5), 1136–1144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.003 Daniëls, E., Hondeghem, A., & Dochy, F. (2019). A review on leadership and leadership development in educational settings. Educational Research Review, 27, 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.003 Fletcher, C., & Williams, R. (1996). Performance Management, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. British Journal of Management, 7(2), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.1996.tb00112.x Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764032000122005 Hargreaves, D. H. (1995). School Culture, School Effectiveness and School Improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 6(1), 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345950060102 Harris, A. (2004). Distributed Leadership and School Improvement. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143204039297 Hong, F. Y. (2017). Antecedent and consequence of school academic optimism and teachers’ academic optimism model. Educational Studies, 43(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1248902 Hoy, W. K. (2012). School characteristics that make a difference for the achievement of all students: A 40-year odyssey. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211196078 Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). A Review of Transformational School Leadership Research 1996–2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760500244769 Lelieur, R., Clycq, N., & Vanhoof, J. (2022). Measuring School and Teacher Academic Optimism in Diverse School Contexts. The Validation of the adapted Survey for Academic Optimism. Pedagogische Studiën, 99(2), 93–113. Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.3.363 Robinson, V. M. J. (2010). From Instructional Leadership to Leadership Capabilities: Empirical Findings and Methodological Challenges. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760903026748 Thien, L. M., & Chan, S. Y. (2020). One-size-fits-all? A cross-validation study of distributed leadership and teacher academic optimism. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220926506 Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002202 Woolfolk Hoy, A., Hoy, W. K., & Kurz, N. M. (2008). Teacher’s academic optimism: The development and test of a new construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 821–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.08.004