Purpose: This article describes how trust emerged as an issue in one school district and the processes by which central office administrators enhanced trust with its school site leaders.
Method: This exploratory participant observer case study uses multiple sources of data including surveys, interviews, observations, and documents collected during a 4-year period from central office and school site leaders.
Findings: The article illustrates how a university partner can play a critical role in surfacing and bringing forth action on an undiscussable issue—trust between the central office and its schools—and the actions taken by the central office to address specific facets of trust: openness, communication, risk, and integrity. The site administrators' response to these actions revealed that trust can be developed at both the relational and organizational leadership levels.
Significance to the Field:The study is significant in illustrating that building trust between the central office and school sites can be an essential step in an underperforming district and can serve as a resource in achieving and sustaining school district reform. It also shows that attending to specific facets of trust can be useful when examining the development of trust between school sites and the district office.
Agullard, K., & Goughnour, D.S. (2006). Central office inquiry: Assessing organization, roles, and actions to support school improvement. San Francisco: WestEd.
2.
Anderson, G.L., & Jones, F. (2000). Knowledge generation in educational administration from the inside out: The promise and perils of site-based, administrator research . Educational Administration Quarterly, 36, 428-464.
3.
Anderson, S.E. (2003). The school district role in educational change: A review of the literature (ICEC Working Paper No. 2). Toronto, Canada: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, International Centre for Educational Change. Retrieved September 20, 2005, from http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~icec/workpaper2.pdf
4.
Argyris, C. (1976). Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(3), 363-375.
5.
Argyris, C. (1999). On organizational learning (2nd ed.). London: Blackwell.
6.
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. (1985). Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D.A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. (2002). Looking back over a decade of whole-school reform: The experience of newAmerican schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 168-175.
9.
Bigley, G.A., & Pearce, J.L. (1998). Straining for shared meaning in organization science: Problems of trust and distrust. Academy of Management Review , 23, 405-421.
10.
Blase, J., & Blase, J.R. (2001). Empowering teachers: What successful principals do (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
11.
Boeije, H. (2002). A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality & Quantity, 36, 391-409.
12.
Bogotch, I., & Brooks, C. (1994). Linking school level innovations with an urban school district's central office. Journal of School Leadership , 4, 12-27.
13.
Bogotch, I.E., Brooks, C., Macphee, B., & Riedlinger, B. (1995). An urban district's knowledge of and attitudes toward school-based innovation. Urban Education , 30, 5-26.
14.
Brewster, C., & Railsback, J. (2003). Building trusting relationships for school improvement: Implications for principals and teachers. Portland, OR : Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
15.
Bryk, A.S., & Schneider, B. (1996). Social trust: A moral resource for school improvement . Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
16.
Bryk, A.S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement . New York: Russell Sage.
17.
Bryk, A.S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource of school reform . Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-44.
18.
Bryk, A., Sebring, P.B., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S., & Easton, J.Q. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform. Boulder, CO: Westview.
19.
Cawelti, G., & Protheroe, N. (2001). High student achievement: How six school districts changed into high-performance systems. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
20.
Chrispeels, J.H. (2002). An emerging conceptual and practical framework for implementing districtwide effective schools reform. Journal for Effective Schools, 1(1), 17-30.
21.
Chrispeels, J.H., Castillo, S., & Brown, J.H. (2000). School leadership teams: A process model of team development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(1), 20-56.
22.
Chrispeels, J.H., & González, M. (2006). The challenge of change in complex educational systems: A district model to scale up reform. In A. Harris & J. H. Chrispeels (Eds.), Improving schools and educational systems: International perspectives (pp. 241-273). London: Routledge.
23.
Coburn, C.E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3-12.
24.
Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1999). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. New York: Harper Business .
26.
Daly, A.J. (2004). A question of trust: Predictive conditions for adaptive and technical leadership in educational contexts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.
27.
Daly, A.J. (2006, November). Rigid response in an age of accountability . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the University Council of Educational Administration, San Antonio, TX.
28.
Daly, A.J., & Chrispeels, J.H. (2005). From problem to possibility: Leadership for implementing and deepening the processes of effective schools . Journal for Effective Schools, 4(1), 7-25.
29.
Daly, A.J., & Chrispeels, J.H. (2008). A question of trust: Predictive conditions for adaptive and technical leadership in educational contexts. Leadership and Policy in Schools7, 1-34.
30.
Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 265-279.
31.
Dirks, K.T. (2000). Trust in leadership and team performance: Evidence from NCAA basketball. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 1004-1012.
32.
Dirks, K.T., & Ferrin, D.L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organizational Science, 12, 450-467.
33.
Dirks, K.T., & Ferrin, D.L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628.
34.
Doerr, R.E. (2005). Teacher union—district relations in the change process: Perspectives of key decision makers in the district office, teacher union, and school board in one school district reflecting on seven years of intensive systemic educational reform efforts, 1996— 2003. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.
35.
Elmore, R.F., & Burney, D. (1998). Continuous improvement in community district #2, New York City (Report to the Office of Educational Research and Improvement) . Pittsburgh, PA: High Performance Learning Communities Project, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
36.
Elmore, R.F., & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teacher learning. In L. Darling Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 236-291). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.
Feldman, J., Lucey, G., Goodrich, S., & Frazee, D. (2003). Developing an inquiry-minded district. Educational Leadership, 60(5).
38.
Firestone, W.A., Mangin, M.M., Martinez, M.C., & Polovsky, T.L. (2005). Leading coherent professional development: A comparison of three districts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 413-448.
39.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press .
40.
Fullan, M., Bertani, A., & Quinn, J. (2004). New lessons for districtwide reform. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 42-46.
41.
Geist, J.R., & Hoy, W.K. (2004). Cultivating a culture of trust: Enabling school structure, teacher professionalism, and academic press. Leading and Managing, 10(2), 1-17.
42.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
Goddard, R.D., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W.K. (2001). A multilevel examination of the distribution and effects of teacher trust in students and parents in urban elementary schools . Elementary School Journal, 102(1), 3-17.
45.
Goetz, J.P., & LeCompte, M.D. (1981). Ethnographic research and the problem of data reduction. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 12, 51-70.
46.
Hanson, M. (2001). Institutional theory and educational change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 637-661.
47.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (1998). What's worth fighting for out there?New York: Teachers College Press.
48.
Harris, A., & Chrispeels, J. H. (Eds.). (2006). Improving schools and educational systems: International perspectives. London : Routledge.
49.
Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2001). Use of constant comparative analysis in qualitative research. Nursing Standard, 15(42), 39-42.
50.
Hightower, A. M., Knapp, M. S., Marsh, J. A., & McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.). (2002). School districts and instructional renewal. New York: Teachers College Press.
51.
Hoy, W.K., & Miskel, C.G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research and practice (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
52.
Hoy, W.K., Sabo, D., & Barnes, K. (1996, Spring). Organizational health and faculty trust: A view from the middle level. Research in Middle Level Education Quarterly, 19(3), 21-39.
53.
Hoy, W.K., Smith, P.A., & Sweetland, S.R. (2002). The development of the organizational climate index for high schools: Its measure and relationship to faculty trust. High School Journal, 86(2), 38-49.
54.
Hoy, W.K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9(3), 184-208.
55.
Jones, G.R., & George, J.M. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implication for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review , 23, 531-546.
56.
Kalleberg, A.L. (2002, November). Trust and high performance work organizations . Paper presented at the Conference on Work Intensification , Paris.
57.
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L.L. (2001). How the way we talk can change the way we work . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
58.
Kochanek, J.R. (2005). Building trust for better schools: Research-based practices. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
59.
Konovsky, M., & Pugh, D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 656-669.
60.
Leithwood, K.A., & Riehl, C. (2003). What we know about successful school leadership . Philadelphia: Laboratory for Student Success, Temple University.
61.
Libler, R.W. (1992). Effective schools: The role of the central office . Contemporary Education, 63(2), 121-124.
62.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
63.
Louis, K.S. (2003). School leaders facing real change: Shifting geography, uncertain paths. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 371-382.
64.
Louis, K.S., & Miles, M.B. (1990). Improving the urban high school: What works and why. New York: Teachers College Press.
65.
Marks, H.M., & Printy, S.M. (2002). Organizational learning in high-stakes accountability environments: Lessons from an urban school district. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Theory and research in educational administration (pp. 1-39). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Massell, D., & Goertz, M.E. (2002). District strategies for building instructional capacity. In A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 43-60). New York: Teachers College Press.
68.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., & Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
69.
Mayer, R.C., & Gavin, M.B. (1999, August). Trust for management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago.
70.
McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2003a). Reforming districts. In A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 173-192). New York: Teachers College Press.
71.
McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2003b). Reforming districts: How districts support school reform (Document No. R-03-6). Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
72.
Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .
73.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
74.
Mishra, A.K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 261-287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75.
Oakes, J. (1992). Can tracking research inform practice? Technical, normative, and political considerations. Educational Researcher , 21(4), 12-21.
76.
Oakes, J., Wells, A.S., Jones, M., & Datnow, A. (1997). Detracking: The social construction of ability, cultural politics, and resistance to reform. Teachers College Record, 98(3), 482-510.
77.
Pajak, E.F., & Glickman, C.D. (1989). Dimensions of school district improvement. Educational Leadership, 46(8), 61-64.
78.
Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
79.
Paulu, N. (1989). Key player in school reform: The superintendent . School Administrator, 46(3), 8-14.
80.
Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
81.
Rotter, J.B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35, 651-665.
82.
Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Introduction to special topic forum: Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393-404.
83.
Sebring, P.B., & Bryk, A.S. (2000). School leadership and the bottom line in Chicago . Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 440-443.
84.
Senge, P.M. (1990). The leader's new work: Building learning organizations . Sloan Management Review, 1(32), 2-23.
85.
Sergiovanni, T.J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .
86.
Shaw, J.B., & Barrett-Power, E. (1997). A conceptual framework for assessing organization, work group, and individual effectiveness during and after downsizing. Human Relations, 50, 109-127.
87.
Six, F., & Nooteboom, B. (2004, August). A typology of trust building actions: A relational signaling approach. Retrieved July 5, 2007, from http://www.bartnooteboom.nl/Frederiquefinal.pdf
Tarter, C.J., Bliss, J.R., & Hoy, W.K. (1989). School characteristics and faculty trust in secondary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 25, 294-308.
91.
Togneri, W., & Anderson, S.E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools—A leadership brief (Stock No. 303369). Washington, DC: Learning First Alliance.
92.
Tolbert, P.S., & Zucker, L.G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory . In S. R. Clegg, W. R. Nord, & C. Hardy (Eds.), The handbook of organizational studies (pp. 175-190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
93.
Tschannen-Moran, M.T. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(4), 308-331.
94.
Tschannen-Moran, M.T. (2003). Fostering organizational citizenship in schools: Transformational leadership and trust. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Studies in leading and organizing schools (pp. 157-180). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
95.
Tschannen-Moran, M.T. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
96.
Tschannen-Moran, M.T., & Hoy, W.K. (1998). Trust in schools: A conceptual and empirical analysis . Journal of Educational Administration, 36, 334-352.
97.
Tschannen-Moran, M.T., & Hoy, W.K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, and measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 71, 547-593.
98.
Waters, J.T., Marzano, R.J., & McNulty, B.A. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.
99.
Weick, K. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems . Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1-9.
100.
Whitener, E.M., Brodt, S.E., Korsgaard, M.A., & Werner, J.M. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, 23, 513-530.
101.
Yin, R.E. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
102.
Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science , 9, 141-159.
103.
Zucker, L.G., Darby, M.R., Brewer, M.B., & Peng, Y. (1996). Collaboration structure and information dilemmas in biotechnology: Organizational boundaries as trust production. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 90-113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
