Dr. Lisa D. Hobson, Prairie View A&M University

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL
VOLUME 27, NUMBER 2, 2010-2011

ANALYSIS OF TEACHER LEADERSHIP
AS A TEACHER DEVELOPMENT MODEL:
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REFORM AND
IMPROVED PRACTICE

Lisa D. Hobson
Prairie View A&M University

Lynn Moss
Wichita, Kansas
ABSTRACT

In this article, we discuss how teacher leadership can be used to enhance the learning
development opportunities for teachers and structured to address the professional
development needs of teachers. Additionally, we explored challenges and barriers to
implementing teacher leadership models and provide strategies for effective use of the
model. Teacher leaders provide instructional leadership support for building and district
administrators. Examination of the effective usage of teacher leaders can help
administrators achieve instructional goals. The purpose of this review of research was to
examine the literature on the use of teacher leadership as a model for teacher
development.

Introduction

T he typical one shot workshop has been ineffective in
addressing the needs of teachers in school buildings. Typically,
the workshop model has been ill-equipped at addressing long
term goals and objectives in schools (Bransford, Brown, and Cocking,
1999). At times, the workshop agenda has been ill-aligned with the
actual needs of the school, particularly when offered at the district
level. To counteract the limited impact of traditional professional
development models, educators have participated in devising models
where they can be participants in the in-service education planning
process. One approach that has been conceptualized to provide

28

29 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

development of teachers is the teacher leadership model. Teacher
leadership can be employed as a site-based management tool for
enhancing the professional development and continuous learning
experiences of teachers.

Traditional methods of teacher leadership have pertained to the
teacher obtaining an administrative position, teacher becoming
involved in an activist movement, and teacher affiliating with and
participating in union activities. Teacher leadership has now become a
focus for professional development based on the premise that teachers
should be involved in the selection, planning, organizing, and hosting
of professional development in schools (Taskforce on Teacher
Leadership of the Institute for Educational Leadership, 2001).

Rather it [Teacher leadership] is about mobilizing the still
largely untapped attributes of teachers to strengthen student
performance at ground level and working toward real
collaboration, a locally tailored kind of shared leadership, in
the daily life of the school. Teachers must be an essential part
of that leadership, never more so than when issues of
instructional leadership are at stake. (Taskforce on Teacher
Leadership of the Institute for Educational Leadership, 2001, p.
4)

Teacher leadership is being used in schools as a means of
sustaining teacher learning about their practices in a manner that is
organized, structured, and consistent. The purpose of this review of
this research was to examine the literature on the use of teacher
leadership as a model for teacher development.

Exploring Teacher Leadership;
Definitions, Premises, and Model

Teacher leadership is the transformation of teaching and
learning to connect key stakeholders in the development of the

Lisa D. Hobson & Lynn Moss 30

learning community. Crowther, Kaagan, Ferguson, and Hann (2002)
state, “Teacher leadership facilitates principled action to achieve
whole-school success. It applies the distinctive power of teaching to
shape meaning for children, youth, and adults” (p. 10). This definition
implies that teacher leadership involves the proactive involvement of
teachers in impacting, enhancing, and preparing the greater
community through the focus on education. Knapp, Copland, and
Talbert (2003) suggested practices to advance powerful and equitable
school learning. One area of focus is identifying and creating a focus
on learning. Also, schools should establish and link communities that
value learning and build external stakeholder partnerships to support
learning. Leadership should be shared and performed in strategic ways
and synergizing efforts should be employed for making learning
connections. These practices serve as foundations for teacher
leadership.

For the emphasis shared leadership, it must be exercised from
different positions in not only the local building level, but also the
district level (Knapp, Copland, & Talbert, 2003). In whatever capacity
and however an employee touches the educational system, that
individual should support student, professional, and system learning.
This effort must provide reinforcement of the various stakeholders in
the classroom. These authors advise that leadership should be
distributed and mobilized across the various levels in a school system
particularly in those areas that directly impact student learning.

Teacher leadership can be manifested and practiced in a variety
of ways dependent upon the model employed in schools. Models of
teacher leadership include: the lead teacher model, the multiple
leadership roles model, and the every-teacher-a-leader model (Gordon,
2004).

The lead teacher model occurs through grade level team
leadership or subject area team leadership. Additional capacities are
advising teachers, staff development associates, and helping teachers.
The multiple leadership roles model requires different school level


specialists to fulfill distinct leadership roles (e.g. peer coaches, action
researchers, beginning teacher mentor, teacher trainers, and program
developer (Gordon, 2004). Distributed leadership as espoused by
Troen and Boles (1994) illustrates the every-teacher-a-leader model.
Another model of teacher leadership sometimes referred to as a sub-
component of the multiple leadership roles model i.e. training of
trainer practice and as a collegial support framework, is the coaching
model (Gordon, 2004). In the past, coaching has occurred through an
informal process. On the other hand, new methods include teachers
employed in the position of academic subject area and exceptional
education coaches. For these reasons, the coaching model is presented
separately.

Toll defined a coach as “one who helps teachers to recognize
what they know and can do, assists teachers as they strengthen their
ability to make more effective use of what they know and do, and
supports teachers as they learn more and do more” (Toll, 2004, p. 5).
The coaching model has roots in the clinical supervision model. Peer
coaching models can involve technical coaching, peer coaching study
teams, team coaching, cognitive coaching, and responsive coaching
(Gordon, 2004).

The different teacher leadership models can be utilized in a
variety of capacities across a school building and on the district level.
In addition to selecting the type of model for teacher development, the
structure of the model should also be considered.

Challenges and Barriers to Effectively
Using Teacher Leadership Models

Although the teacher leadership models can be manifested and
structured in a number of ways to meet the needs of individual
schools, challenges exist which can inhibit the development of this
model. These challenges should be considered in order to: select
appropriate teacher leader models for buildings, structure models for


maximum effectiveness, and emphasize the need for continuous
evaluation in adopting any models in schools.

One challenge pertains to the nexus of supervision and teacher
leadership. Teacher leaders may be directly asked to perform
leadership responsibilities. Also, behaviors teacher leaders perform
may seem quasi-supervisory. Sometimes, there can be an overlap
between coaching-type and supervisory-type responsibilities as well
(Toll, 2004).

Troen and Boles (1994) discussed the difficulty of
institutionalizing the leadership roles of teachers due to teacher
reluctance to view themselves as leaders, the hierarchical structure of
schools, the egalitarian/protective nature of teachers about their
classrooms, and the issue of power. Some others refer to these
challenges as a paradox. Knowledgeable and highly skilled teachers
have the capacity to assume strong roles in improving learning yet
they lack positional power to do so (Stokes, Helms, & Maxon, 2003).
Additional barriers relate to pervasive conceptions about the role of
teachers, the structure of the systems, and misconceptions about
teacher leadership. Teachers are hesitant and unwilling to in make
decisions which will impede on the sovereignty of other teachers
(Buckner & McDowelle, 2000). As well, the newness of certain types
of teacher leader models such as the coaching teacher leadership
model in many schools may cause hesitancy of staff members in
accepting the role of the coach (Toll, 2004).

Some barriers pertain to perceptions about teacher leaders
while others relate to how teacher leadership is organized in schools.
The barriers identified by Crowther et al. (2002), pertaining to
conceptions are the I’m only a teacher mentality or I only want to
teach mentality as well as a lack of confidence in teaching abilities.
These same authors found organizational barriers which prohibit the
success of teacher leaders such as lack of time for professional
development, potential abuse by manipulative stakeholders,
marginalizing, non-existent administrator support, lack of clarity of the


teacher leadership concept, lack of rewards, lack of emphasis/presence
in teacher education preparation, and the system’s reinforcement of the
premise that the principal is the only leader. These types of barriers all
relate to the structure of the system. Pervasive misconceptions which
exist are myths that teacher leadership breeds discord and promotes
dissent. Additionally, some types of barriers can be overlapping.

Other critical challenges include the problems that have
plagued administrators in their roles. Reluctance to assume teacher
leadership roles may be grounded in the notion that administrators are
already operating in a critical and sometimes problematic and
subversive arena so the tendency would be to avoid adding, perhaps,
already-burdened teachers to that phenomenon (Taskforce on Teacher
Leadership of the Institute for Educational Leadership, 2001).
Additionally, with teachers experiencing and addressing several
critical issues regarding the profession, teacher leadership can be
relegated to a less-urgent or less-relevant position (Taskforce on
Teacher Leadership of the Institute for Educational Leadership, 2001).
Other challenges include the burdening of teacher leaders with
excessive responsibilities or supervisory responsibilities.

In conducting research focus groups with teachers, university
professors, and faculty and staff of the Michigan Education
Association, Crowther et al., (2002) found that because of the
nebulous nature of some teacher leadership positions in districts, the
teacher leaders may be viewed as adversarial by administrators. On the
other hand, because decisions made about teachers do not always
involve teachers, these individuals may relinquish their rights under
teacher leadership due to the historical practice of keeping teachers out
of decision making efforts in a school. Additionally, Crowther et al.
(2002) were critical of educator preparation institutions. They stated
that the nature of university professors is contradictory to the success
of teacher leadership. Participants at a university in their study stated
that the university environment can be a breeding ground for
questioning and cynicism due to university scholarship.


Lastly, another teacher leader training issue cited for National
Board Certified Teachers was the lack of professional development
related to teacher leadership (Stokes, Helms, & Maxon, 2003). For the
2009 annual conference, the National Board for Professional Teaching
Standards (NBPTS) will offer teacher leadership development strand,
referred to as Leading Beyond the Classroom, as one of its five core
competencies (NBPTS, 2009). All of these practices can discourage a
culture of success and prevent teacher leadership models from being
implemented effectively.

Structuring Teacher Leadership for Effectiveness

There are key practices that are essential to the organization
and direction of the teacher leadership model as a professional
development tool. Irrespective of the model, professional development
must impact student achievement and be designed to target the needs
of the school. Gordon (2004) discussed the value of stakeholder
empowerment which he lists as a necessary facet for professional
development to be effective. Professional development that is
empowering includes the following components: (a) Training
designed to meet participants’ perceptions of needs; (b) planning,
delivery, and evaluation involving participants; (c) full administrator
participation in all segments of the professional development; (d)
participants’ advance-knowledge of aspects of the professional
development; (e) voluntary participation of participants; (f) long term
professional development; (e) connection to participants’ experiences,
prior knowledge, and interests; (f) active involvement and engagement
of participants; (g) instruction of new skills and feedback on
performance; (h) learning differentiation in session participation; (i)
flexible opportunities to address participant issues and perceptions; (j)
connection to the broader program, and (k) elimination of forced
adoption of new strategies. Teacher leadership approaches should be
conceptualized by considering the literature on effective professional
development. In a two year study of 10 exemplary teacher leaders, the
participants cited the importance of high quality professional


development (Swanson, 2000). Additionally, development can occur
at the university level. Faculty at Vanderbilt’s Peabody College
developed a 14 course curriculum on teacher leadership (NASBE,
2009a).

Another teacher leadership practice includes the study group
approach whereby small groups emerge to focus on inquiry related to
an issue. Murphy (1999) referred to the whole-faculty study group
model where groups of “certificated individuals” meet in at local site
level to explore student learning and what can be done to impact
student learning through the meshing of the knowledge, resources, and
experiences of the participants. Gordon (2004) espoused, for study
groups to be effective, membership should be voluntary and diverse.
Secondly, leadership should be shared. Thirdly, group rules should be
established. Additionally, logistics should be discussed and planned.
Also, experimentation and flexibility should be allowed. Lastly,
connections should be made between theory and practice.

Another study group format is the Critical Friends Group
organized by the National School Reform Faculty where teachers
improve their teaching practice by communicating with and receiving
feedback from colleagues about classroom teaching and learning
activities (Bambino, 2002). In action research groups, educators
collect data about the school environment for the purpose of research
and evaluation on a team-based or school-wide focus (Gordon, 2004).
Troen & Boles (1994) commented the roles of teachers and principals
should be redefined to institutionalize teacher leadership.

Toll (2004) has conducted research on considerations for using
the coaching model. This author recommends the following practices
when using the coaching model: Coaching responsibilities should be
separate from teacher performance evaluation processes. The
administrator should retain sole responsibility for handling supervisory
issues (unless children are being endangered or the coach needs
protection). In avoiding supervisory behaviors, coaches should
consider asking for peer feedback on coaching, focusing on observable


behaviors and not responses, working with teachers one-on-one,
inviting teachers to share in study groups, and cautiously/carefully
communicating with supervisor. Coaches are advised to communicate
neutrally with supervisors (through written summarization of coaching
sessions performed with the whole school or delineated by grade level.
When supervisors indicate performance improvement is needed,
coaches should allow the respective teachers to approach them for
feedback. If administrators continuously assign supervisory functions,
coaches should ask for assistance in role clarification. Particularly,
items need-based training, new skill development and performance
feedback, learner differentiation, and are key practices of the teacher
leadership coaching model.

To eliminate communication barriers, leaders have effective
interpersonal relationships, manage legitimate i.e. position power,
solicit feedback, become active listeners, show empathy with
followers, and understand ethical norms for conversations. Effective
communication techniques can eliminate different types of
communication barriers such as: information overload, status
difference, semantics, filtering, paralanguage, and poor interpersonal
relations (Green, 2009).

School stakeholders and administrators should note the
difference between excellent teachers and teachers who can be teacher
leaders. Not only are the traits of advanced levels of expertise, ability
to collaborate, reflection, and ability to be flexible vital, but also
teacher leaders need to have competence in pedagogical content
knowledge and access to a professional network of mentors to support
continuous and sustained learning (Swanson, 2000). Teacher
leadership transcends beyond only being a good teacher.

Furthermore, Troen and Boles (1994) asserted school districts
should evaluate the ability of principals to encourage teacher
leadership. In a review of peer coaching models, Gordon (2004) stated
that peer coaching should subscribe to non-evaluative, collegial,
classroom-based, observation-based, nonjudgmental, and trust-based


principles. Although this model can be cost effective because teachers
are already on staff, leaders should be provided additional
compensation or release time.

Lastly, teacher leadership programs can be evaluated. The
National Association of State Boards of Education provide a set of
evaluation questions to be used at the state and district levels for
assessing the usage and/or effectiveness of teacher leadership models
(NASBE, 2009b). Administrators can examine the effectiveness of the
modes for ensuring support of instructional and school improvement
goals.

Conclusions and Implications for Practice and Research

In their review of 100 publications about teacher leadership,
York-Barr and Duke (2004) found little empirical evidence to support
the effects of teacher leadership on student learning, yet they
recommend continued research on this practice. Given these findings,
additional research is needed that captures the roles of teacher leaders
that impact student achievement from the perspectives of a number of
stakeholders in the educational field. In contrast to York-Barr and
Duke’s findings, Swanson (2000) conducted a two-year study of 10
exemplary teacher leaders. These types of schools with exemplars can
serve as sites for conceptualizing theoretical and analytical
frameworks for teacher leadership models as well as additional
research to support the models. These models would be based on
actual school settings where teacher leaders have been effective.
Although York-Barr and Duke’s findings directly challenge the use of
teacher leadership models, their considerations can also serve as
catalysts for teacher leadership reform and initiating additional
research as teacher leadership models continue to be used in schools.
Hobson, Green, and Duncan (2009) recommend the use of standards in
the preparation and development of teacher leaders to effectively
impact student achievement.


Furthermore, schools that employ teacher leaders with high or
consistently and significantly improving academic achievement could
be studied to determine which components of teacher leadership have
been found effective or facilitate success. Several key considerations
emerge with respect to why teacher leadership models may be
ineffective or may not be reporting effectiveness.

In the process of adopting teacher leadership practices in
schools, admittedly, there are several factors which can facilitate,
hinder or impede the process. These factors are not insurmountable.
We likened the process of adopting teacher leadership to administering
a prescription to a patient who refuses to take the medicine, whose
body rejects the medicine, does not follow the recommended dosage,
or does not consume the medicine during the initial stages of his/her
illness. If the patient is not willing to take the medicine or misses the
window of opportunity, the treatment is ineffective. If districts are
willing to provide necessary resources and follow appropriate
strategies for implementing teacher leadership, the models will be
ineffective. Time, adequate planning, networking, and stakeholder
support are critical factors to be addressed in adopting teacher
leadership models (Troen &Boles, 1994; Crowther et al., 2002).
Timing and capacity-building assume a role in garnering stakeholder
support. These considerations illuminate the need to address
challenges and barriers encountered in adopting teacher leadership
practices. If utilized effectively, teacher leadership models have the
potential to impact achievement in schools. There is a need to study
the roles teacher leaders assume which positively impact academic
achievement (York-Barr & Duke, 2004). Additionally, researchers
should identify what resources would support teacher leader
development to improve student learning. School districts should
consistently collect data about tasks teacher leaders perform and
evaluate the quality of those tasks in impacting academic achievement.

Lastly, we reflected on the stages of change for individual
learners. Some individuals have varying rates of change which are not
calibrated along a set time frame or certain phase. Others move


forward in changing and also revert backwards in the change process.
Decision-making to facilitate change can be done incrementally to
facilitate success. Administrators must understand the decision making
process and how to effectively use it. When decision making is not
conducted effectively, the school is negatively affected (Green, 2009).
With adequate scheduling, planning, proper implementation, support
for change, appropriate structuring, effective implementation, and
continuous evaluation, we advocate that teacher leadership can be a
valuable and effective model for use by schools to improve student
achievement.


REFERENCES

Bambino, D. (2002, March). Critical friends. Educational leadership.
Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum and
Development.
Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn:
Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Research
Council, Committee on Developments in the Science of
Learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Buckner, K. G., & McDowelle, J. O. (2000). Developing teacher
leaders: Providing encouragement, opportunities, and support.
NASSP Bulletin. Retrieved March 16, 2009, from
http://www.sacle.edu.au/files/Developingteacherleadership.pdf
Crowther, F., Kaagan, S. S., Ferguson, M., & Hann, L. (2002).
Developing teacher leaders: How teacher leadership enhances
school success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press - Sage
Publications.
Gordon, S. P. (2004). Professional development for school
improvement: Empowering learning communities. Boston,
MA: Pearson Education, Incorporated.
Green, R. L. (2009). Practicing the art of leadership: A problem-
based approach to implementing the ISLLC standards (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Incorporation.
Hobson-Horton, L. D., Green, R. L., & Duncan, B. (2009, Winter).
The usage of the SREB critical success factors in developing
teacher leaders to assume instructional leadership
responsibilities. International Journal of Teacher Leadership,
2(2), 69-88.
Knapp, M. S., Copland, M. A., & Talbert, J. E. (2003). Leading for
learning: Reflective tools for school and district leaders.
Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
Murphy, C. U. (1999, Summer). Study groups. Journal of Staff
Development, 49-51. Oxford, OH: National Staff
Development Council.


National Association of State Boards of Education (2009a). Teacher
Leadership: State actions. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from
http://www.nasbe.org/leadership/leadership-
continuum/teacher-leadership/stateactions
National Association of State Boards of Education (2009b). Teacher
Leadership: Critical questions. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from
the National Association of State Boards of Education website:
http://www.nasbe.org/leadership/leadership-
continuum/teacher-leadership/critical-questions
National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (2009).
Concurrent sessions. Retrieved February 1, 2009, from the
National Board of Professional Teaching Standards website:
http://www.nbpts.org/about_us/2009_national_conference1/co
ncurrent_sessions
Stokes, L. Helms, J., & Maxon, D. (2003). Evaluation of the
Washington initiative year 2 (2002-2003): A study of
leadership. Retrieved March 10, 2009, from the Center for
Strengthening the Teaching Profession website:
http://www.cstpwa.org/Navigational/Teacherleadership/evaluat
ion.pdf
Swanson, J. (2000, April). What differentiates an excellent teacher
from a teacher leader? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting
of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, LA.
Taskforce on Teacher Leadership of the Institute for Educational
Leadership (2001). Leadership for student learning:
Redefining the teacher as leader. Washington, DC: Institute
for Educational Leadership.


Toll, C. (2004, October). Separating coaching from supervising.
English Leadership Quarterly, 5-7.
Troen, V., & Boles, K. (1994). Two teachers examine the power of
teacher leadership. In D. R. Walling (Ed.), Teachers as
leaders: Perspectives on professional development of teachers
(pp.275-286). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher
leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review
of Educational Research, 74(3), 255-316.

Dr. Lisa D. Hobson, Prairie View A&M University

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (19)

Ähnlich wie Dr. Lisa D. Hobson, Prairie View A&M University

Ähnlich wie Dr. Lisa D. Hobson, Prairie View A&M University (20)

Mehr von guest3c8a16c

Mehr von guest3c8a16c (9)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (16)

Dr. Lisa D. Hobson, Prairie View A&M University