INTRODUCTION/THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Educational systems undergoing decentralization and continuous reform increasingly rely on leadership models that extend beyond formal school management.  Despite many leadership approaches-styles , distributed leadership has been promoted as a mechanism for enhancing teacher empowerment, professional learning, teacher motivation, teacher collaboration and  instructional quality (Bellibaş et al., 2021; Bektaş et al., 2022). However, empirical evidence explaining how distributed leadership translates into  teacher self-efficacy remains limited, especially in educations systems undergoing transition. This study seeks to contribute to the ongoing academic debate on the factors that may influence the enhancement of teacher self-efficacy in context of leadership roles and autonomy  by examining the role of distributed leadership and the mechanisms through which it may operate. Enhancing teacher self-efficacy is essential due to its documented associations with multiple professional outcomes  (Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008; Marcionetti & Castelli, 2023).

Self-efficacy is defined asindividuals’ beliefs in their capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to attain desired outcomes in specific situations (Bandura 1997) .

 In education this can be translated as teachers’ beliefs in their capability to plan, organize, and carry out the actions required to successfully accomplish specific teaching tasks and to positively influence student learning, engagement, and classroom management, even in challenging or demanding situations (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy 2001). Self-efficacy has been linked to reduced burnout and increased teacher resilience, enhanced  teacher agency and overall student’s academic outcomes (Li,2023; Wang,2022).  In the Kosovo context, strengthening and sustaining teachers’ self-efficacy is particularly important, as the education system is undergoing continuous reform and transition.

On the other hand, two constructs that are widely discussed lately in the contemporary educational leadership literature and that may have important implications for teachers’ professional functioning and enhanced  self-efficacy are teacher autonomy and teacher leadership.
Teacher autonomy refers to teachers’ perceived control over instructional practices and may operate as a key mechanism through which distributed leadership enables teachers to exercise professional judgment in instructional decision-making, potentially contributing to enhanced instructional quality and teacher agency (OECD, 2019).

Teacher leadership, in turn, can be understood as teachers’ active involvement in leading instructional improvement, professional learning, and school-level initiatives beyond their classroom responsibilities, which may support teachers’ professional capacity and sense of efficacy (Sawalhi & Chaaban, 2022).

Furthermore, although teacher self-efficacy has been consistently associated with positive professional outcomes, integrative models that simultaneously examine how distributed leadership may influence teacher self-efficacy through teacher autonomy and teacher leadership and how these variables interact with each other remain scarce in European education systems undergoing systemic transition.

The conceptual model is grounded in Distributed Leadership Theory, the Job Demands–Resources (JD–R) model, and Social Cognitive Theory. Distributed leadership is conceptualized as a collective and relational practice enacted through interactions among school actors rather than being confined to formal roles (Spillane, 2006). From a JD–R perspective, distributed leadership functions as an important organizational resource that enhances teachers’ autonomy and professional agency, thereby activating motivational processes (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Drawing on Social Cognitive Theory, such supportive leadership conditions are expected to strengthen teachers’ self-efficacy by shaping beliefs in their instructional capabilities (Bandura, 1997). Accordingly, this study seeks to address the following research questions:

questions:

1.What is the impact of distributed leadership on teacher self-efficacy, teacher leadership, and teacher autonomy?

2. What is the impact of teacher autonomy on teacher leadership and teacher self-efficacy?

3.  What is the impact of teacher leadership on teacher self-efficacy?

4. How do teacher autonomy and teacher leadership, individually and sequentially, mediate the relationship between distributed leadership and teacher self-efficacy?

METHODOLOGY Design and Data Source The study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional research design using data aligned with the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) framework. The sample consisted of 3,281 in-service teachers working in public schools in Kosovo. Analysis was conducted Using R (version 4.x) with the lavaan package and the WLSMV estimator, CFA was performed to assess construct validity via factor loadings and fit indices, followed by SEM to test the hypothesized relationships Measures The data were collected using questionnaires adapted from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2024. Distributed Leadership: 8 items measuring shared decision-making and collaborative leadership practices. Teaching Autonomy: 5 items capturing autonomy in instructional and pedagogical work. Teacher Leadership: 4 items assessing teachers’ involvement in leadership roles and professional influence. Teacher Self-Efficacy: 16 items reflecting confidence in instruction, classroom management, and student engagement. DATA ANALYSIS Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the measurement model and establish construct validity and reliability prior to structural modeling. The model including Distributed Leadership, Teaching Autonomy, Teacher Leadership, and Teacher Self-Efficacy—demonstrated a very good fit to the data (CFI = .972, TLI = .970, RMSEA = .049, SRMR = .017). All items loaded strongly and significantly on their intended latent constructs, with standardized factor loadings ranging from .85 to .91 for Distributed Leadership, .96 to .98 for Teaching Autonomy, .87 to .92 for Teacher Leadership, and .71 to .88 for Teacher Self-Efficacy. These results support the factorial validity and internal consistency of the measurement model.

FINDINGS/CONCLUSION The findings of this study contribute to literature and practice because they demonstrate that teacher self-efficacy is not solely an individual psychological trait but a collective outcome shaped by school leadership structures and organizational conditions. The results show strong direct effect of distributed leadership on teacher self-efficacy which indicates that when leadership responsibilities, decision-making, and professional influence are shared across the school, teachers develop greater confidence in their instructional abilities. Equally important is the evidence that distributed leadership operates through interconnected mechanisms rather than isolated pathways. The positive effects results of distributed leadership on teaching autonomy and teacher leadership show that leadership distribution creates the structural and professional space necessary for teachers to exercise judgment and assume leadership roles. The significant mediation and serial mediation effects highlight teacher leadership and autonomy as critical mechanisms through which distributed leadership is converted into stronger self-efficacy beliefs. These results indicate that teachers’ self-efficacy develops primarily through active participation in leadership and successful professional practice, rather than through formal autonomy or delegated responsibilities in isolation. In this sense, teacher leadership and autonomy function as a bridge between organizational structures and individual psychological outcomes. Taken together, these findings advance leadership theory by clarifying how distributed leadership shapes teacher self-efficacy, moving beyond simple direct-effect models toward a more process-oriented understanding. From practical perspective and in system undergoing transition , the results suggest that school leadership reforms should focus not only on decentralizing authority but also on creating conditions that enable teachers to enact leadership in their daily work. In these systems, strengthening teacher self-efficacy therefore requires coherent leadership practices that integrate autonomy, teacher leadership, professional collaboration, and opportunities for teachers to lead instructional improvement.

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands–Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman. Bektaş, F., Kılınç, A. Ç., & Gümüş, S. (2022). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher professional learning: mediating roles of teacher trust in principal and teacher motivation. Educational studies, 48(5), 602-624. Bellibaş, M. Ş., Gümüş, S., & Liu, Y. (2021). Does school leadership matter for teachers’ classroom practice? The influence of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on instructional quality. School effectiveness and school improvement, 32(3), 387-412. Li, S. (2023). The effect of teacher self-efficacy, teacher resilience, and emotion regulation on teacher burnout: A mediation model. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1185079. Marcionetti, J., & Castelli, L. (2023). The job and life satisfaction of teachers: a social cognitive model integrating teachers’ burnout, self-efficacy, dispositional optimism, and social support. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 23(2), 441-463. OECD, T. A. L. I. S. (2019). RESULTS (VOLUME I): TEACHERS AND SCHOOL LEADERS AS LIFELONG LEARNERS, TALIS. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 Sawalhi, R., & Chaaban, Y. (2022). Student teachers’ perspectives towards teacher leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 25(4), 586-602. Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self‐efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied psychology, 57, 152-171. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783-805. Wang, L. (2022). Exploring the relationship among teacher emotional intelligence, work engagement, teacher self-efficacy, and student academic achievement: A moderated mediation model. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 810559.