Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)
Teacher’s trustMeasurement, sources and consequences of teacher’s interpersonal trust within schools forvocational education and trainingThomsen, M.
Link to publication
Creative Commons License (see https://creativecommons.org/use-remix/cc-licenses):Other
Citation for published version (APA):Thomsen, M. (2018). Teacher’s trust: Measurement, sources and consequences of teacher’s interpersonal trustwithin schools for vocational education and training.
General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s),other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, statingyour reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Askthe Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam,The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.
Download date: 11 Mar 2020
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
145
References Abu Nasra, M., & Heilbrunn, S. (2016). Transformational leadership and
organizational citizenship behavior in the Arab educational system in Israel:
The impact of trust and job satisfaction. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 44(3), 380–396.
Adams, C. M., & Forsyth, P.B. (2009). The nature and function of trust in schools.
Journal of School Leadership, 19(2), 126-153.
Admiraal, W., Kruiter, J., Lockhorst, D., Schenke, W., Sligte, H., Smit, B., …De Wit,
W. (2016). Affordances of teacher professional learning in secondary schools.
Studies in Continuing Education, 38(3), 281-298.
Ahn, J., & Brewer, D. J. (2009). What do we know about reducing class and
school size? In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, & D. N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of
education policy research (pp. 426-437). New York, NY: Routledge.
Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 93, 1-18.
Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to
the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 49, 252-276.
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: a review and a proposed theory.
The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 673-704.Ärlestig, H. (2007). Principals’
communication inside schools: A contribution to school improvement? The
Educational Forum, 71, 262-273.
Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing
performance and turnover. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 670-
687.
Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the
relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a
social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 267-285.
Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy
and student achievement. New York, NY: Longman.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
146
Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P., Conley, S. C., & Bauer, S. (1990). The
dimensionality of Decision participation in educational organizations: The value
of a multi-domain evaluative approach. Educational Administration Quarterly
26, 126–167.
Baek, Y. M., & Jung, C. S. (2015). Focusing the mediating role of institutional trust:
How does interpersonal trust promote organizational commitment? The Social
Science Journal, 52, 481–489.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industrial, military, and educational
impact. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Becker, B., & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance work systems and firm
performance: A synthesis of research and management implications. In G. R.
Ferris (Ed.), Resource in personnel and human resource management (Vol.
16, pp. 53-101). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Belogolovsky, E., & Somech, A. (2010). Teachers’ organizational citizenship
behavior: examining the boundary between in-role behavior and extra-role
behavior from the perspective of teachers, principals and parents. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 26, 914-923.
Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1988). Voice and justification: Their influence on
procedural fairness judgments. The Academy of Management Journal, 31,
676–685.
Blank, J., Felsö, F., & Van der Aa, R. (2012). Productiviteitstrends in het middelbaar
beroepsonderwijs [Trends in productivity in vocational education]. Delft, The
Netherlands: TU Delft, IPSE Studies.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, NY: Wiley.
Bogler, R. (2005). The power of empowerment: meditating the relationship between
teachers’ participation in decision making and their professional commitment.
Journal of School Leadership, 15, 76-98.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
147
Bogler, R., & Nir, A. E. (2012). The importance of teachers' perceived organizational
support to job satisfaction: What's empowerment got to do with it? Journal of
Educational Administration, 50(3), 287 – 306.
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of teacher empowerment on teachers’
organizational commitment, professional commitment and organizational
citizenship behavior in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 277–
289.
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2005). Organizational citizenship behavior in school. How
does it relate to participation in decision making? Journal of Educational
Administration, 43(5), 420-438.
Bolin, F. S. (1989). Empowering leadership. Teachers College Record, 91, 81-96.
Borton, W. (1991, April). Empowering teachers and students in a restructuring
school: A teacher efficacy interaction model and the effect on reading
outcomes. Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association in Chicago, IL.
Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2011). Strategy and Human Resource Management (3rd
ed). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.
Brouwer, P. (2011). Collaboration in teacher teams (doctoral dissertation). Utrecht,
The Netherlands: University of Utrecht.
Brouwer, P., & Van Kan, C. (2015). Overwegingen bij de rolverdeling in teams in het
mbo [Considerations during the distribution of tasks in teams in VET schools].
Den Bosch, The Netherlands: ecbo.
Brower, H. H., Lester, S. W., Korsgaard, M. A., & Dineen, B. R. (2009). A closer look
at trust between managers and subordinates: Understanding the effects of
both trusting and being trusted on subordinate outcomes. Journal of
Management, 35(2), 327-347.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing
model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21, 230–258.
Browning, P. (2014). Why trust the head? Key practices for transformational school
leaders to build a purposeful relationship of trust. International Journal of
Leadership in Education, 17(4), 388-409.
Bryk, A., Camburn, E., & Louis, K. (1999). Professional community in
Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational
consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 751-781.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
148
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (1996). Social trust: a moral resource for school
improvement. Madison, WI: Center on Organizations and Restructuring of
Schools, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: a core resource for
improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: a core resource for reform.
Educational leadership, 60(6), 40-45.
Buck, J., & Watson, J. (2002). Retaining stuff employees: The relationship between
human resource management strategies and organizational commitment.
Innovative Higher Education, 26(3), 175-193.
Butler, J. K. (1983). Reciprocity of Trust between Professionals and Their
Secretaries. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 411-416.
Butler, J. K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust:
evolution of a conditions of trust inventory. Journal of Management, 17(3),
643-63.
Butler, J. K., & Cantrell, R. S. (1984). A behavioral decision theory approach to
modeling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports,
55, 19-28.
Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. Journal of Abnormal
Social Psychology, 62, 713-715.
Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Büssing, A. (2000). Identität und Vertrauen durch Arbeit in virtuellen Organisationen?
[Identity and trust through work in virtual environments?] In M. Boos, K. J.
Jonas & K. Sassenberg (Eds.), Computervermittelte Kommunikation in
Organisationen [Computer transmitted communication in organizations] (pp.
57-72). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
Büssing, A. (2002). Trust and its relations to commitment and involvement in work
and organizations. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 28(4), 36-42.
Cacioppi, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need
for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
Caldwell, B. J. (1990). Educational reform through school-size management: An
international perspective on restructuring in education. In S. B. Bacharach
(Ed.), Advances in research and theory of school management and
educational policy (Vol. 1, pp. 303-333). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
149
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-
efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic
achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44,
473–490.
Chacon, C. T. (2005). Teachers' perceived efficacy among English as a foreign
language teachers in middle schools in Venezuela. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 21, 257−272.
Chan, W., Lau, S., Nie, Y., Lim, S., & Hogan, D. (2008). Organizational and personal
predictors of teacher commitment: The mediating role of teacher efficacy and
identification with school. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 597-
630.
Chiaburu, D. S., & Byrne, Z. S. (2009). Predicting OCB role definitions: Exchanges
with the organization and psychological attachment. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 24(2), 201-214.
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P.E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A
meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
86(2), 278-321.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001).
Justice in the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational
justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425-445.
Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., Piccolo, R.F., Zapata, C. P., & Rich, B.L. (2012).
Explaining the Justice-Performance Relationship: Trust as Exchange
Deepener or Trust as Uncertainty Reducer? Journal of Applied Psychology,
97(1), 1-15.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust
propensity: a meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking
and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The Empowerment Process: Integrating
Theory and Practice. Academy of Management, 13(3), 471-482.
Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational
commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 53, 39-52.
Cooke, R., & Lafferty, J. (1987). Organizational culture inventory, Level V. Chicago,
IL: Human Synergistics.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
150
Cosner, S. (2009). Building organizational capacity through trust. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 248-291.
Cosner, S. (2010). Drawing on a knowledge-based trust perspective to examine and
conceptualize within-school trust development by principals. Journal of School
Leadership, 20(2), 117-144.
Costa, A. (2003). Understanding the nature and the antecedents of trust within work
teams. In B. Nooteboom & F. Six (Eds.), The trust process in organizations:
Empirical studies of the determinants and the process of trust development
(pp. 105-124). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Costa, A., Roe, R., & Taillieu, T. (2001). Trust within teams: The relation with
performance effectiveness. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 19, 225-244.
Cousins, J., & Walker, C. (1995). Predictors of educators' valuing of systemic inquiry
in schools. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, Special Issue, 25−35.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M., & Shore L. M. (2007). The employee-organization
relationship: Where do we go from here? Human Resource Management
Review, 17(2), 166-179.
Cranston, J. (2011). Relational trust: The glue that binds a professional learning
community. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 57, 59-72.
Daly, A. J. (2009). Rigid response in an age of accountability: the potential of
leadership and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 168-216.
Daly, A. J., & Chrispeels, J. (2008). A question of trust: predictive conditions for
adaptive and technical leadership in educational contexts. Leadership and
Policy in Schools, 7(1), 30-63.
David, J. L. (1989). Synthesis of research on school-based management.
Educational Leadership, 46(8), 45-53.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Duemer, L. (2003). Structural antecedents and
psychological correlates of teacher empowerment. Journal of Educational
Administration, 41(3), 257-277.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Singleton, C. A. (2006). Organizational commitment of
teachers in urban schools: Examining the effects of team structures. Urban
Education, 41(6), 603-627.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
151
Demir, K. (2015). The effect of organizational trust on the culture of teacher
leadership in primary schools. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(3),
621-634.
De Nobile, J. J., & McCormick, J. (2008). Organizational communication and job
satisfaction in Australian Catholic primary schools. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 36, 101-122.
De Rooij, J. P. G., & Vink, C. R. (2009). Commitment van middenmanagers
[Commitment of middle managers]. Tilburg, The Netherlands: IVA.
Dhillon, J. K. (2009). The role of social capital in sustaining partnership. British
Educational Research Journal, 35(5), 687-704.
Dietz, G., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2006). Measuring trust inside organisations.
Personnel Review, 35(5), 557-588.
DiPaola, M. F., & Hoy, W. K. (2005). School characteristics that foster organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of School Leadership, 15, 387-406.
DiPaola, M. F., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Organizational citizenship in schools
and its relationship to school climate. Journal of School Leadership, 11, 424-
447.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and
implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4),
611-628.
Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P., & Mullen, M. R. (1998). Understanding the Influence of
National Culture on the Development of Trust. Academy of Management
Review, 23(3), 601-620.
Drehmer, D. E., & Grossman, J. H. (1984). Scaling managerial respect: A
developmental perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44,
763-776.
Driscoll, J. W. (1978). Trust and participation in organizational decision making as
predictors of satisfaction. The Academy of Management Journal, 21(1), 44-56.
Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (2010). Kerncijfers 2005-2009
[Key figures 2005-2009]. The Haque, The Netherlands: Ministerie van
OCW.
Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (2012). Kerncijfers 2007-2011
[Key figures 2007-2011]. The Haque, The Netherlands: Ministerie van OCW.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
152
Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001).
Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86(1), 42-51.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived
organization support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(1), 500–507.
Elffers, L. (2011). The transition to post-secondary vocational education: Students’
entrance, experiences and attainment (doctoral dissertation). Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.
Feather, N. T., & Rauter, K. A. (2004). Organizational citizenship behaviors in
relation to job status, job insecurity, organizational commitment and
identification, job satisfaction and work values. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 77, 81–94.
Ferres, N., & Travaglione, A. (2003, December). The development and validation of
the workplace trust survey (WTS): combining qualitative and quantitative
methodologies. Paper presented at APROS, Emotions, Attitudes, and Culture
Stream, Oaxaca, Mexico.
Ford, L. R., & Seers, A. (2006). Relational leadership and team climates: Pitting
differentiation versus agreement. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 258-270.
Forte, A. M., & Flores, M. A. (2014). Teacher collaboration and professional
development in the workplace: a study of Portuguese teachers. European
Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 91-105.
Fredrickson, J. W. (1986). The strategic decision process and organizational
structure. The Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 280-297.
Fullan, M., & Watson, N. (2000). School-based management: Reconceptualizing to
improve learning outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
11, 453-473.
Gambetta, D. (1988). Can we trust trust? In D. Gambetta (Ed), Making and Breaking
Cooperation Relations (pp. 213-237). New York, NY: Basil Blackwell.
Geijsel, F. P., Sleegers, P. J. C., Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2003). Transformational
leadership effects on teachers’ commitment and effort toward school reform.
Journal of Educational Administration, 41, 228–256.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
153
Geijsel, F. P., Sleegers, P. J. C., Stoel, R. D., & Krüger, M. L. (2009). The effect of
teacher psychological and school organizational and leadership factors on
teachers' professional learning in Dutch schools. The Elementary School
Journal, 109, 406-427.
Ghamrawi, N. (2011). Trust me: Your school can be better – A message from
teachers to principals. Educational Management Administration & Leadership,
39, 333-348.
Gill, H., Boies, K., Finegan, J. E., & McNally, J. (2005). Antecedents of trust:
establishing a boundary condition for the relation between propensity to trust
and intention to trust. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(3), 287-302.
Gillespie, N. A. (2003, August). Measuring trust in working relationships: the
behavioral trust inventory. Paper presented at the Academy of Management
Meeting, Seattle, WA.
Gillespie, N. A, & Dietz, G. (2009). Trust repair after an organization-level failure.
Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 127-145.
Gillespie, N. A., & Mann, L. (2004). Transformational leadership and shared values:
The building blocks of trust. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, 588-607.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy:
Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American
Educational Research Journal, 37, 479–507.
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, 3-18.
Gopinath, C., & Becker, T. E. (2000). Communication, procedural justice, and
employee attitudes: Relationships under conditions of divestiture. Journal of
Management, 26, 63-83.
Gratton, L., & Truss, C. (2003). The three-dimensional people strategy: Putting
human resources policies into action. Academy of Management Executive,
17(3), 74–86.
Groenenberg, R., & Visser, K. (2011). De breedte van de docentfunctie [The width of
the teacher job]. In R. Van Schoonhoven & A. Olthof (Eds.), Personeelsbeleid
in het middelbaar beroepsonderwijs [Human resource management in
vocational education] (pp. 39-50). Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands:
Kluwer.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
154
Guskey, T. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the
implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education,
4, 63−69.
Hall, R. H. (1977). Organizations: Structure and process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., & Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed
leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of
Educational Change, 8, 337-347.
Heck, R. H. (2009). Teacher effectiveness and student achievement: Investigating a
multilevel cross-classified model. Journal of Educational Administration, 47,
227-249.
Hermanussen, J., & Thomsen, M. (2011). Werken in teams – Stand van zaken
[Working in teams – The state of affairs]. In R. van Schoonhoven & A. Olthof
(Eds.), Personeelsbeleid in het middelbaar beroepsonderwijs [Human
resource management in vocational education] (pp. 51–77). Alphen aan den
Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Herriott, R. E., & Firestone, W. A. (1984). Two images of schools as organizations: A
refinement and elaboration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(4), 41-
57.
Honingh, M. E. (2008). Beroepsonderwijs tussen publiek en privaat [Vocational
education between public and private] (doctoral dissertation). Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.
Hooge, E. H., Honingh, M. E., & Langelaan, B. N. (2011). The teaching profession
against the background of educationalisation: an exploratory study. European
Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 297–315.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling:
Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research
Methods, 6, 53-60.
Hord, S. M. (1986). A synthesis of research on organizational collaboration.
Educational Leadership, 43(5), 22-26.
Hoy, W. K. (1990). Organizational climate and culture: A conceptual analysis of the
school workplace. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation,
1(2), 149-168.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
155
Hoy, W. K. (2012). School characteristics that make a difference for the achievemen
of all students: A 40-year odyssey. Journal of Educational Administration,
50(1), 76-97.
Hoy, W. K., Gage, C. Q., & Tarter, C. J. (2006). School mindfulness and faculty trust:
necessary conditions for each other? Educational Administration Quarterly, 42,
236-255.
Hoy, W. K., & Kupersmith, W. (1985). The meaning and measure of faculty trust.
Educational and Psychological Research, 5, 1-10.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2008). Educational administration: Theory, research, and
practice (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
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.
Hoy, W. K., & Sweetland, S. R. (2000). Bureaucracies that work: Enabling not
coercive. Journal of School Leadership, 10, 525-541.
Hoy, W. K., & Sweetland, S. R. (2001). Designing better schools: the meaning and
nature of enabling school structure. Educational Administration Quarterly,
(37)3, 296-321.
Hoy, W. K., & Tarter, C. J. (2004). Organizational justice in schools: no justice without
trust. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(4), 250-259.
Hoy, W. K., & Tarter, C. J. (2008). Administrators solving the problems of practice:
Decision making concepts, cases, and consequences (3rd ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Bliss, J. R. (1990). Organizational climate, school health,
and effectiveness: A comparative analysis. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 26, 260–279.
Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Witkoskie, L. (1992). Faculty trust in colleagues: linking
the principal with school effectiveness. Journal of Research and Development
in Education, 26(1), 38-45.
Hoy, W. K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1999). Five faces of trust: an empirical
confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9,
184-208.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
156
Hoy, W. K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). The conceptualization and
Measurement of faculty trust in schools. In W.K. Hoy & C. Miskel (Eds.),
Studies in leading and organizing schools (pp. 181-208). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing.
Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1993). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and the
organizational health of schools. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 356–
372.
Huff, L., & Kelley, L. (2003). Levels of organizational trust in individualist versus
collectivist societies: a seven-nation study. Organization Science, 14(1), 81-
90.
Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Rosseel, Y. (2009). The relationship between the perception
of distributed leadership in secondary schools and teachers’ and teacher
leaders’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. School Effectiveness
and School Improvement, 20, 291–317.
Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Van Keer, H. (2011). The relation between school leadership
from a distributed perspective and teachers’ organizational commitment:
Examining the source of the leadership function. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 47, 728-771.
Imants, J., Sleegers, P., & Witziers, B. (2001). The tension between organisational
sub-structures in secondary schools and educational reform. School
Leadership & Management, 21, 289-307.
Johnson, R. E., & Chang, C. (2008). Relationship between organizational
commitment and its antecedents: Employee self-concept matters. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 38(2), 513-541.
Johnson-George, C., & Swap, W.C. (1982). Measurement of specific interpersonal
trust: construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(6), 1306-1317.
Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Social context of performance evaluation
decisions. The Academy of Management Journal, 36, 80-105.
Karsten, S. (2016). De hoofdstroom in het Nederlandse onderwijsdelta: Een nuchtere
balans van het mbo [The mainstream in the Dutch Educational delta: A sober
sum up of the vocational education and training sector]. Apeldoorn, The
Netherlands: Garant-Uitgevers nv.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
157
Karsten, S., & Meijer, J. (1999). School-based management in the Netherlands: The
educational consequences of lump-sum funding. Educational Policy, 13, 421-
439.
Khasawneh. S, (2011). Shared leadership and organizational citizenship behavior in
Jordanian public universities: Developing a global workforce for the 21st
century. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39, 621-634.
Khatri, N., Bavejo, A., Boren, S. A., & Mammo, A. (2006). Medical errors and quality
of care: from control to commitment. California Management Review, 48(3),
115-141.
Kiffin-Petersen, S. A., & Cordery, J. L. (2003). Trust, individualism and job
characteristics as predictors of employee preference for teamwork.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1), 93-116.
Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. C. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and
teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12,
59–76.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New
York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Kochanek, J. (2005). Building trust for better schools: Research-based practices.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange.
The Academy of Management Journal, 37, 656-669.
Korevaar, G. (1990, April). Secondary school teachers' courses of action in relation to
experience and sense of self-efficacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the American Educational Research Association in Boston, MA.
Kramer, R. M. (1996). Divergent realities and convergent disappointments in the
hierarchic relation: trust and the intuitive auditor at work. In R.M. Kramer, &
T.R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in Organisations: Frontiers of Theory and Research
(pp. 114-139). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives,
enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569-98.
Kramer, R. M. (Ed.) (2006). Organizational trust: a reader. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Kramer, R. M., & Tyler, T. R. (Eds.) (1996). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of
Theory and Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
158
Lau, D. C., & Liden, R. C. (2008). Antecedents of Coworker Trust: Leaders’
Blessings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1130-1138.
Lau, D. C., Liu, J., & Fu, P. P. (2007). Feeling trusted by business leaders in China:
Antecedents and the mediating role of value congruence. Asia Pacific Journal
of Management, 24, 321–340.
Leary, M. R., Shepperd, J. A., McNeil, M. S., Jenkins, T. B., & Barnes, B. B. (1986).
Objectivism in information utilization: Theory and measurement. Journal of
Personality, 50, 32-43.
Lee, A. N., & Nie, Y. (2014). Understanding teacher empowerment: Teachers’
perceptions of principal’s and immediate supervisor’s empowering behaviors,
psychological empowerment and work-related outcomes. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 41, 67-79.
Lee, J. C., Zhang, Z., & Yin, H. (2011). A multilevel analysis of the impact of a
professional learning community, faculty trust in colleagues and collective
efficacy on teacher commitment to students. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 27, 820-830.
Lee, V., Dedick, R., & Smith, J. (1991). The effect of the social organization of
schools on teachers’ efficacy and satisfaction. Sociology of Education, 64,
190–208.
Leithwood, K. , Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing
times. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Levine, T. H., & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers’
collaborative activities facilitate and constrain teacher learning. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 26, 389–398.
Lewicki, R., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work
relationships. In R.M. Kramer, & T.R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in Organisations:
Frontiers of Theory and Research (pp. 114-139). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New
relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438-458.
Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C., & Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust
development: theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future
directions. Journal of Management, 32(6), 991-1022.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
159
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Kraimer, M. L., & Sparrowe R. T. (2003). The dual
commitment of contingent workers: An examination of contingents’
commitment to the agency and the organization. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 24(5), 609-625.
Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teacher’s
professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91, 509–536.
Louis, K. S. (1998). Effects of teacher quality of work life in secondary schools on
commitment and sense of efficacy. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 9, 1-27.
Louis, K. S. (2007). Trust and improvements in schools. Journal of Educational
Change, 8, 1-24.
Louis, K. S., Dretzke, B., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010). How does leadership affect
student achievement? Results from a national US survey. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(3), 315-336.
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. New York: John Wiley.
Marescaux, E., De Winne, S., & Sels, L. (2012). HR practices and HRM outcomes:
the role of basic need satisfaction. Personnel Review, 42(1), 4-27.
Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating
justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair work procedures and
treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4),
738–748.
Mathieu, J., & Zajac, M. (1990). A review and meta-Analysis of the antecedents,
correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological
Bulletin, 108(2), 171-194.
Mattei, P. (2012). Market accountability in schools: Policy reforms in England,
Germany, France and Italy. Oxford Review of Education, 38, 247-266.
Mayer, R. C., & Davis, H. J. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system
on trust for management: a field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 84(1), 123-136.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of
organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.
Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2007). The effects of leader communication on a
worker's intent to stay: An investigation using structural equation modeling.
Human Performance, 20, 85-102.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
160
MBO Raad (2008). Collectieve arbeidsovereenkomst voor beroepsonderwijs en
volwasseneneducatie 2007-2009 [Collective agreement for vocational training
and adult education 2007-2009]. Rijswijk, The Netherlands: Den Haag media
group.
MBO Raad (n.d.). MBO scholen [VET schools]. Retrieved from
http://www.mboraad.nl/?page/1640252/Mbo-scholen.aspx
McAllister, D. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for
interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal,
38(1), 24-59.
McDaniel, O., & Wanders, B. (2006). Personeel als kritisch succesfactor [Personnel
as critical factor for success]. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: CBE Consultants.
McEvily, B., Perrone, V., & Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle.
Organization Science, 14(1), 91-103.
McEvily, B., & Tortoriello, M. (2011). Measuring trust in organizational research:
review and recommendations. Journal of Trust Research, 1(1), 23-63.
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in
new organizational relationships. The Academy of Management Review,
23(3), 473-490.
Meglino, B. M., Ravlin, E. C., & Adkins, C. L. (1989). A work values approach to
corporate culture: A field test of the value congruence process and its
relationship to individual outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 424-
432.
Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2000). Ode to Luther Gulick: Span of control and
organizational performance. Administration & Society, 32, 115-137.
Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2003). Span of control and public organizations:
Implementing Luther Gulick’s research design. Public Administration Review,
63, 61-70.
Meirink, J. (2007). Individual teacher learning in a context of collaboration in teams
(doctoral dissertation). Utrecht, The Netherlands: University of Utrecht.
Meristo, M., & Eisenschmidt, E. (2014). Novice teachers’ perceptions of school
climate and self-efficacy. International Journal of Educational Research, 67, 1–
10.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
161
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1984). Testing the "side-bet theory" of organizational
commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 69, 372-378.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: theory, research,
and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and
occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective,
continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis
of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 61, 20-52.
Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: the centrality of trust. In R.
M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and
research (pp. 261-287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Molm, L. D., Takahashi, N., & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange:
An experimental test of a classical proposition. American Journal of
Sociology, 105, 1396-1427.
Moore, W., & Esselman, M. (1992, April). Teacher efficacy, power, school climate,
and achievement: A desegregating district’s experience. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San
Francisco, CA.
Moorman, R. H., Niehoff, B. P., & Organ, D. W. (1993). Treating employees fairly and
organizational citizenship behavior: Sorting the effects of job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and procedural justice. Employee Responsibilities
and Rights Journal, 6, 209–225.
Mossholder, K. W., Richardson, H. A., & Settoon, R. P. (2011). Human resource
systems and helping in organizations: A relational perspective. Academy of
Management Review, 36, 33–52.
Motowildo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual
differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10, 71-
83.
Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of
organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
162
Moye, M. J., Henkin, A. B., & Egley, R. J. (2005). Teacher-principal relationships.
Exploring linkages between empowerment and interpersonal trust. Journal of
Educational Administration, 43(3), 260-277.
Muchinsky, P. M. (1977). Organizational communication: Relationships to
organizational climate and job satisfaction. The Academy of Management
Journal, 20, 592–607.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2006). Mplus Statistical Analysis With Latent
Variables. User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Napier, B. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Distance in organizations. Human Resource
Management Review, 3, 321-357.
Nguni, S., Sleegers, P., & Denessen, E. (2006). Transformational and transactional
leadership effects on teachers' job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
and organizational citizenship behavior in primary schools: The Tanzanian
case. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 145-177.
Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship
between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior.
Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.
Nyhan, R. C., & Marlowe, H. (1997). Development and psychometric properties of the
organizational trust inventory. Evaluation Review, 21, 614–635.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Roberts, K. H. (1977). Task group structure, communication, and
effectiveness in three organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 674-
681.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier
syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time.
Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97.
Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational
citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents and consequences. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Perrow, C. (1972). Complex organizations: A critical essay. Glenview, IL: Scott
Foresman.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
163
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Moorman, R., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational
leader behaviors and their effects on follower Trust in leader, satisfaction,
and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107–142.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research:
Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.
Pounder, D. G. (1997). Teacher teams: Promoting teacher involvement and
leadership in secondary schools. The High School Journal, 80, 117-124.
Rappaport, A., Bancroft, E., & Okum, L. (2003). The aging workforce raises new
talent management issues for employees. Journal of Organizational
Excellence, 23(1), 55-66.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived Organizational Support: A Review
of the Literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698-714.
Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the
organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825-836.
Roberts, K. H., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1974). Measuring organizational communication.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 321-326.
Roeser, R., Arbreton, A., & Anderman, E. (1993, April). Teacher characteristics and
their effects on student motivation across the school year. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in
Atlanta, GA.
Rone, B. C. (2009). The impact of the data team structure on collaborative teams and
student achievement (doctoral dissertation). St. Charles, MO: Lindenwood
University.
Ronfeldt, M., Farmer, S. O., McQueen, K., & Grissom, J. A. (2015). Teacher
collaboration in instructional teams and student achievement. American
Educational Research Journal, 52(3), 475–514.
Rosenholtz, S. (1989). Teacher’s workplace: The social organization of schools. New
York, NY: Longman.
Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of
Personality, 35(4), 651-665.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt R. S. & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after
all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393-
404.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
164
Runhaar, P., Konermann, J., & Sanders, K. (2013). Teachers’ organizational
citizenship behavior: Considering the roles of their work engagement,
autonomy and leader-member exchange. Teaching and Teacher Education,
30, 99-108.
Runhaar, P., & Runhaar, H. (2012). HR policies and practices in vocational education
and training institutions: Understanding the implementation gap through the
lens of discourses. Human Resource Development International, 15(5), 609-
625.
Runhaar, P., & Sanders, K. (2013). Implementing Human Resources Management
(HRM) within Dutch VET institutions: Examining the fostering and hindering
factors. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 65(2), 236-255.
Runhaar, P., & Sanders, K. (2016). Promoting teachers’ knowledge sharing. The
fostering roles of occupational self-efficacy and Human Resources
Management. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(5),
794–813.
Runhaar, P., Sanders, K., & Konermann, J. (2013). Teachers’ work engagement:
Considering interaction with pupils and human resources practices as job
resources. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 2017–2030.
Runhaar, P., Ten Brinke, D., Kuijpers, M., Wesselink, R., & Mulder, M. (2014).
Exploring the links between interdependence, team learning and a shared
understanding among team members: The case of teachers facing an
educational innovation. Human Resource Development International, 17(1),
67-87.
Sagnak, M. (2012). The empowering leadership and teachers’ innovative behavior:
the mediating role of innovation climate. African Journal of Business
Management, 6(4), 1635-1641.
Satorra, A. (2000). Scaled and adjusted restricted tests in multi-sample analysis of
moment structures. In R. D. H. Heijmans, D. S. G. Pollock & A. Satorra (Eds.),
Innovations in multivariate statistical analysis. A Festschrift for Heinz
Neudecker (pp.233-247). London, UK: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
165
Schriensheim, C. A., Powers, K. J., Scandura, T. A., Gardiner, C. C., & Lankau, M. J.
(1993). Improving construct measurement in management research:
comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content
adequacy of paper-and-pencil survey-type measurements. Journal of
Management, 19(2), 385-417.
Schweiger, D. M., & DeNisi, A. S. (1991). Communication with employees following a
merger: A longitudinal field experiment. The Academy of Management
Journal, 34, 110–135.
Seibert, E. S., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences
of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analytic
review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 981-1003.
Senger, J. (1971). Managers’ perceptions of subordinates’ competence as a function
of personal value orientations. The Academy of Management Journal, 14, 415-
423.
Serva, M. A., Fuller, M. A., & Mayer, R. C. (2005). The reciprocal nature of trust: A
longitudinal study of interacting teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
26(6), 625-648.
Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations:
Perceived organizational support, leader –member exchange and employees
reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 219-227.
Sheppard, B. H., & Sherman, D. M. (1998). The grammars of trust: A model and
general implications. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 422-437.
Short, P. (1994). Defining teacher empowerment. Education, 114(4), 153-176.
Short, P., & Greer, J. (1997). Leadership in empowered schools: Themes from
innovative effort. Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall.
Short, P., & Johnson, P. (1994). Exploring the links among teacher empowerment,
leader power, and conflict. Education, 114(4), 581-594.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and
relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher
burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 611–625.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A
study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1059-1069.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
166
Smeenk, S. G. A., Eisinga, R. N., Teelken, J. C., & Doorewaard, J. A. C. M. (2006).
The effects of HRM practices and antecedents on organizational commitment
among university employees. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management,17, 2035–2054.
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior:
Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653–663.
Smylie, M. A. (1992). Teacher participation in school decision making: Assessing
willingness to participate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 53-
67.
Smylie, M. A., & Hart, A. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning and change:
A Human and social capital development perspective. In J. Murphy & K. S.
Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 421-
441). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Smylie, M. A., Lazarus, V., & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1996). Instructional outcomes of
school-based participative decision making. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 18, 181-198.
Smylie, M. A., Miretzky, D., & Konkol, P. (2004). Rethinking teacher workforce
development: A strategic human resource management perspective. Yearbook
of the National Society for the Study of Education, 103, 34–69.
Somech, A. (2002). Explicating the complexity of participative management: An
investigation of multiple dimensions. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38,
341-371.
Somech, A. (2010). Participative decision making in schools: A mediating-
moderating analytical framework for understanding school and teacher
outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 174-209.
Somech, A., & Bogler, R. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of teacher
organizational and professional commitment. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 38(4), 555-577.
Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2000). Understanding extra-role behavior in
schools: The relationships between job satisfaction, sense of efficacy, and
teachers’ extra-role behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 649-659.
Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2007). Schools as team-based organizations: A
structure-process-outcome approach. Group Dynamics, Theory, Research,
and Practice, 11(4), 305-320.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
167
Somech, A., & Ron, I. (2007). Promoting organizational citizenship behavior in
schools: the impact of individual and organizational characteristics.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 38-66.
Sweetland, S. R., & Hoy, W. K. (2000). School characteristics and educational
outcomes: toward an organizational model of student achievement in middle
schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 703-729.
Tarter, C. J., Hoy, W. K., & Bliss, J. R. (1989). Principal leadership and organizational
commitment: the principal must deliver. Planning and Changing, 20, 139-149.
Taylor, D. L., & Tashakkori, A. (1997). Toward an understanding of teachers’ desire
for participation in decision making. Journal of School Leadership, 7, 609-628.
Thomsen, M., Karsten, S., & Oort, F. J. (2015). Social exchange in Dutch schools for
vocational education and training: The role of teachers’ trust in colleagues, the
supervisor and higher management. Educational Management Administration
& Leadership 2015, 43(5), 755-771.
Thomsen, M., Karsten, S., & Oort, F. J. (2016). Distance in schools: the influence of
psychological and structural distance from management on teachers’ trust in
management, organisational commitment, and organisational citizenship
behavior. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 27(4), 594-612.
Thoonen, E., Sleegers, P., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to
improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational
factors, and leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3)
496-536.
Tourish, D., & Hargie, O. (1998). Auditing staff-management communication in
schools: A framework for evaluating performance. International Journal of
Educational Management, 12, 176-182.
Tremblay, M., Cloutier, J., Simard, G., Chênevert, D., & Vandenberghe, C. (2010).
The role of HRM practices, procedural justice, organizational support and trust
in organizational commitment and in-role and extra-role performance. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(3), 405-433.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of
Educational Administration, 39, 308-331.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). Fostering organizational citizenship: Transformational
leadership and trust. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Studies in leading
and organizing schools (pp. 157-179). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
168
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools: The role
of leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2),
217-247.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: An
essential ingredient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational
Administration, 53(1), 66-92.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Trust in schools: a conceptual and
empirical analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(4), 334-352.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. K. (2000). A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the
Nature, Meaning, and Measurement of Trust. Review of Educational
Research, 70(4), 547-593.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self‐efficacy: Four
professional development formats and their relationship to self‐efficacy and
implementation of a new teaching strategy. The Elementary School Journal,
110(2), 228-245.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an
elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2007). The differential antecedents of
self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 23, 944-956.
Van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., & Lens, W. (2008). Explaining
the relationship between job characteristics, burnout and engagement: the role
of basic psychological need satisfaction. Work and Stress, 22(3), 277-294.
Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A
systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17–40.
Van Maele, D., & Van Houtte, M. (2009). Faculty trust and organizational school
characteristics: an exploration across secondary schools in Flanders.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(4), 556-589.
Van Maele, D., & Van Houtte, M. (2011). Collegial Trust and the Organizational
Context of the Teacher Workplace: the Role of a Homogeneous Teachability
Culture. American Journal of Education, 117(4), 437-464.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
169
Van Maele, D., & Van Houtte, M. (2012). The role of teacher and faculty trust in
forming teachers’ job satisfaction: do years of experience make a difference?
Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 879-889. Van Maele, D., & Van Houtte, M. (2015). Trust in school: a pathway to inhibit
teacher burnout? Journal of Educational Administration, 53(1), 93 – 115.
Van Schoonhoven, R., Olthof, A., & Thomsen, M. (2011). Personeelsbeleid in het
mbo [Human resource management in vocational education]. In R. Van
Schoonhoven & A. Olthof (Eds.), Personeelsbeleid in het middelbaar
beroepsonderwijs [Human resource management in vocational education] (pp.
7-19). Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Vecchio, R. P., Justin, J. E., & Pearce, C. L. (2010). Empowering leadership: an
Examination of mediating mechanisms within a hierarchical structure. The
Leadership Quarterly, 21, 530-542.
Van Veen, K., Sleegers, P., Bergen, T., & Klaassen, C. (2001). Professional
orientations of secondary school teachers towards work. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 17, 175-194.
Wahlstrom, K. L., & Louis, K. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal
leadership: the roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared
responsibility. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 458-495.
Walton, R. E. (1985). From control to commitment in the workplace. Harvard
Business Review, 85(2), 76-84.
Wang, H., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2015). Self-efficacy and causal attributions in
teachers: Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 120-130.
Wasmer, D. J., & Bruner, G. C. (2000). The antecedents of market orientation in
higher education. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 9, 93-105.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2002). The role of fair
treatment and rewards in perceptions of organizational support and leader-
member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 590-598.
Weibel, A. (2003). Trust within and between organizations. conceptual issues and
empirical applications. Personnel Review, 32(5), 667-671.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
170
Wesselink, R., Dekker-Groen, A. M., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2010). Using
an instrument to analyse competence-based study programmes: Experiences
of teachers in Dutch vocational education and training. Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 42, 813–829.
White, P. A. (1992). Teacher empowerment under ideal school-site autonomy.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(1), 69-82.
Whitener, E. M. (2001). Do “high commitment” human resource practices affect
employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linear
modeling. Journal of Management, 27, 515-535.
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(3),
513-530.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational
commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behavior.
Journal of Management, 17, 601-617.
Witt, L. A. (1991). Exchange ideology as a moderator of job attitudes: Organizational
citizenship behavior relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
21(18), 1490-1501.
Witziers, B., Sleegers, P., & Imants, J. (1999). Departments as Teams: functions,
variations and alternatives. School Leadership & Management, 19(3), 293-
304.
Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and their
beliefs about managing students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6, 137-
148.
Woolfolk Hoy, A., Hoy, W. K., & Davis, H. A. (2009). Teachers' self-efficacy beliefs.
In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation in school (pp. 627-
655). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Yin, H., Lee, J. C. K., & Zhang, Z. (2012). The effect of trust on teacher
empowerment: The mediation of teacher efficacy. Educational Studies, 39(1),
13-28.
Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
References _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
171
Yukl, G. A., & Fu, P. P. (1999). Determinants of delegation and consultation by
managers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 219-232.
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.
Zand, D. E. (1972). Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 17, 229-239.
Zeinabadi, H., & Salehi, K. (2011). Role of procedural justice, trust, job satisfaction,
and organizational commitment in Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)
of teachers: Proposing a modified social exchange model. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1472-1481.
Summary ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
173
Summary Teacher’s Trust Measurement, Sources and Consequences of Teacher’s Interpersonal Trust Within
Schools for Vocational Education and Training
Introduction Schools need committed employees who are willing to ‘go the extra mile’ to reach the
school’s goals and objectives (e.g. Somech & Ron, 2007). Dutch schools for
vocational education and training (VET), like many other schools around the world,
are confronted with ever growing demands. Thus for schools it seems worthwhile to
consider, how they can stimulate teachers’ commitment and behavior that goes
above and beyond minimal job requirements, for example, with their HRM, structure
and climate. Referring to Blau’s (1964) social exchange theory, this dissertation
argues that interpersonal trust may be the key to commitment and behavior that
exceeds job requirements, usually referred to as organizational citizenship behavior
(OCB). In VET schools recent developments, such as an increase in size of schools,
larger spans of control, greater autonomy and the introduction of team-based
structures may have changed the nature and importance of social exchange
relationships between teachers and (agents of) their school. In view of the role that
teacher’s trust may play in social exchange between a teacher and (agents of)
his/her school and the lack of research on this topic in schools, this dissertation
addresses the following research questions:
How can individual teacher’s trust be conceptualized and measured?
How do current organizational characteristics of VET schools relate to
teacher’s trust?
How does teacher’s trust relate to his/her self-efficacy, affective organizational
commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior?
Which role does teacher’s trust play in the relationship between current
organizational characteristics, which may be part of the teacher’s social
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
174
exchange relationship with (agents of) the school, and teacher’s self-efficacy,
affective organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior?
Methodology Four studies were conducted. The first study (chapter 2) comprises an in-depth
conceptualization of interpersonal trust, a review of the measurement of interpersonal
trust, particularly in educational research, and the further development of a
measurement instrument for surveys which measures individual teacher’s trust in the
teacher team and the immediate supervisor. The other three studies are quantitative
studies based on the data of 884 (respectively 845, chapter 5) teachers of 10 Dutch
VET school, analyzed using structural equation modeling. These studies focus on
the relationship between a school’s high-commitment HRM, particularly structural
teacher empowerment, and teacher’s trust (chapter 3), the relationship between the
school’s structure and teacher’s psychological distance from management to
teacher’s trust in management as well as the relationship between psychological
distance and two aspects of the school’s HRM, specifically participation in decision
making and top-down communication (chapter 4), and the relationship between the
school’s climate and teacher’s trust and the social exchange relationship between
teachers and their school (chapter 5). Further these studies focus on the relationship
between teacher’s trust and desirable teacher outcomes, specifically self-efficacy
(chapter 3), affective organizational commitment and organizational citizenship
behavior (chapter 4 and 5).
Results
Conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal trust
The review and analysis (chapter 2) indicates that despite the large number of
different conceptualizations of interpersonal trust, organizational research is
increasingly adopting the view that interpersonal trust includes two key elements,
Summary ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
175
positive expectations of the intentions or behaviors of the other party and the
willingness to be vulnerable/take a risk in the relationship with another party. In
theory the antecedents of trust can be summarized in five different categories: the
trustor’s propensity to trust, characteristics of the trust referent (trustee) that
determine his/her trustworthiness, the quality and nature of the trustor-trustee
relationship, macro-level cues, and domain- and situational factors (Dietz & Den
Hartog, 2006). The measurement of interpersonal trust with psychometric techniques
is very fragmented and the instruments seem to have several shortcomings, such as
a lack of (evidence of) construct validity. In educational research the measurement of
teacher’s trust is less fragmented as most studies made use of the original or slightly
adopted instrument of Hoy and Tschannen-Moran (1999, 2003). Despite its good
internal validity, also this instrument seems to have some limitations. Five additional
trust measurement instruments used in educational studies were identified and
analyzed. However, none of these instruments was in line with the current
conceptualization of trust employed in this dissertation. Thus, a high-quality
interpersonal trust measurement instrument (cf. Gillespie, 2003) was further
developed and verified to measure Dutch VET school teacher’s trust in the teacher
team and the immediate supervisor. It showed good reliability and theoretical as well
as empirical construct validity.
The relationship between organizational characteristics and teacher’s trust
Teacher’s trust in the teacher team seems to be positively related to teachers’ on-
task and learning-oriented collaboration. Further some aspects of structural teacher
empowerment seem to enhance teacher’s trust in the teacher team, via enhanced
collaboration. Particularly, participation in educational decisions and opportunities for
professional growth are positively related to teacher’s trust in the teacher team, via
enhanced learning-oriented collaboration and participation in educational and
financial decisions, opportunities for professional growth and team autonomy about
administrative tasks are positively related to teacher’s trust in the teacher team, via
enhanced on-task collaboration (chapter 3). In addition, a supportive climate is
positively related to teacher’s trust in the teacher team (chapter 5).
Teacher’s trust in the immediate supervisor also seems to positively relate to
structural teacher empowerment, particularly to teacher’s opportunities for
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
176
professional development and the teacher team’s autonomy about administrative
tasks (chapter 3). A fair and supportive climate as well as teachers’ on-task
collaboration seem to affect teacher’s trust in the supervisor (chapter 3 and 5). On
the contrary, having different work-related values (psychological distance) than the
supervisor seemed to reduce teacher’s trust in the supervisor; participation in
educational decisions and adequacy and openness of top-down communication
seemed to reduce teacher’s psychological distance to the supervisor (chapter 4).
Teacher’s trust in higher management seems to be positively related to
several aspects of structural teacher empowerment, particularly to teacher’s
participation in financial decisions, his/her opportunities for professional development
and the teacher team’s autonomy about educational tasks (chapter 3). Further, a
supportive and fair climate and teachers’ on-task collaboration seems to correspond
positively with teacher’s trust in higher management (chapter 3 and 5), whereas
teacher’s perceived work-related value differences (psychological distance) from
higher management seemed to reduce teacher’s trust in higher management;
participation in financial and educational decisions making and adequacy and
openness of top-down communication seems to reduce teacher’s psychological
distance to higher management (chapter 4).
The relationship between teacher’s trust and desirable teacher outcomes
The findings of this dissertation indicate that teacher’s trust is positively related to
teacher’s self-efficacy, affective organizational commitment (AOC) as well as
organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). The teacher’s trust referent seems to be of
particular importance as only teacher’s trust in the teacher team seems to affect the
studied attitudes and behavior of teachers. Teacher’s trust in the teacher team was
related to teacher’s self-efficacy, whereas teacher’s trust in management was not
(chapter 3). Although teacher’s trust in the supervisor seemed to relate positively to
AOC, OCB towards colleagues and OCB regarding information, and teacher’s trust in
higher management to AOC (chapter 4), this link seems to disappear when teacher’s
trust in the teacher team is considered simultaneously (chapter 5). In the study
reported on in chapter 5, only trust in the teacher team related to AOC, OCB towards
colleagues, and OCB regarding information. This indicates that, next to
characteristics of the trustee, also characteristics of the trustor which are independent
Summary ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
177
of the trustee, such as the trustor’s propensity to trust or macro-level cues, relate to
AOC and OCB. OCB regarding extra tasks did not correlate with teacher’s trust in
any of the trust referents (chapter 4 and 5).
The role of trust in the teacher-school social exchange relationship
The findings indicate that teacher’s trust in the school may play a mediating role
between several organizational characteristics and teacher outcomes. However, in
relation to the teacher outcomes included in this study only trust in the teacher team
seems to matter. Teacher’s trust in the teacher team plays a mediating role between
several organizational characteristics and teacher’s OCB, AOC and self-efficacy. The
findings show (chapter 5) that the relationships between a supportive climate,
conceptualized as perceived organizational support, and teacher’s OCB towards
colleagues and OCB regarding information are mediated by trust in the teacher team
and the relationship between a supportive climate on teacher’s AOC is partly
mediated by trust in the teacher team. Furthermore, the relationships between
elements of structural teacher empowerment and teacher’s self-efficacy seem to be
mediated by trust in the teacher team. Particularly, participation in educational
decisions and opportunities for professional growth seem to relate to teacher’s self-
efficacy via teacher’s trust in the teacher team (and enhanced learning-oriented and
on-task collaboration) and participation in financial decision and team autonomy
about administrative tasks seem to influence teacher’s self-efficacy via trust in the
teacher team and enhanced on-task collaboration (chapter 3).
Conclusions & discussion
This study indicates that schools have several ways to increase teacher’s trust in
(agents of) schools by implementing an organizational structure, culture and human
resource practices, which signal to teachers that they are trusted and valued.
Teacher’s trust in all school members is likely to be beneficial to the school, however,
VET school teachers’ affective commitment to the school and organizational
citizenship behavior seem to be predominantly influenced by their trust in the teacher
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
178
team. This may be related to the specific context of this research. Team-based
structures and large spans of control may decrease the management’s impact on the
teacher’s overall judgment of the school and increase the significance of teacher’s
trust in the teacher team for teachers to feel committed to the organization and ‘go
the extra mile’. The results highlight the value of teacher’s trust in the teacher team
for the well-functioning of the school. Although many of the sources of trust between
teachers are likely to be outside the school’s management influence, this study
identified several ways to create organizational conditions that may enhance the
development of teacher’s trust between and social exchange with other teachers,
such as the promotion of collaboration though structural teacher empowerment and a
supportive organizational climate. As Dutch VET schools have been implementing
team-based structures with more authority granted to teacher teams and large spans
of control, it seems that this development may be beneficial to social exchange with
and trust between teachers. At the same time, and in combination with increased
sizes and more business-oriented leadership of Dutch VET schools, it may have
hampered the development of social exchange relationships between teachers and
management. Nonetheless, as long as teacher’s behavior is in line with the school’s
goal and objectives this does not need to be a constraint. As indicated by the findings
of this study, also participation in decision making might increase teachers’ sense of
responsibility for achieving the school’s goals and objectives and may motivate them
to ‘go the extra mile’ for the school.
Dutch Summary _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
179
Dutch Summary Het vertrouwen van leraren Meten, bronnen en uitkomsten van het inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen van leraren
binnen regionale opleidingscentra
Introductie Scholen hebben betrokken medewerkers nodig, die bereid zijn een stapje extra te
doen om de doelstellingen van de school te halen (bijv. Somech & Ron, 2007). Zoals
vele scholen in de hele wereld, zijn Nederlandse regionale opleidingscentra (roc’s)
geconfronteerd met steeds stijgende verwachtingen. Het is dus noodzakelijk voor
deze scholen om zich af te vragen hoe zij betrokkenheid en taakoverstijgend gedrag
van leraren kunnen bevorderen, bijvoorbeeld met behulp van hun human resource
management (HRM), structuur en klimaat. Gebaseerd op Blau’s (1964) sociale ruil
theorie, wordt in dit proefschrift geargumenteerd dat inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen de
basis voor betrokkenheid en taakoverstijgend gedrag zouden kunnen zijn. Recente
ontwikkelingen bij roc’s, zoals een toename in grootte van roc’s, grotere spans of
control, meer autonomie en de introductie van een teamgerichte structuur, zouden de
aard en het belang van sociale ruil relaties tussen leraren en (andere leden van) de
school hebben kunnen veranderd. Gezien de rol die vertrouwen zou kunnen spelen
in de sociale ruil relatie tussen een leraar en zijn/haar school en het gebrek aan
onderzoek naar dit thema, richt zich dit proefschrift op de volgende
onderzoeksvragen:
Hoe kan het vertrouwen van leraren geconceptualiseerd en gemeten worden?
Welke relaties hebben organisatiekenmerken van roc’s met vertrouwen van leraren?
Welke relaties heeft vertrouwen van leraren met hun zelfredzaamheid, affectieve
betrokkenheid bij de school en taakoverstijgend gedrag?
Welke rol speelt vertrouwen in de relatie tussen organisatiekenmerken, welke deel
zouden kunnen zijn van de sociale ruil relatie tussen een leraar en zijn/haar school,
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
180
en zijn/haar zelfredzaamheid, affectieve betrokkenheid bij de school en
taakoverstijgend gedrag?
Methodologie Vier studies zijn uitgevoerd. De eerste studie (hoofdstuk 2) bevat een gedetailleerde
conceptualisatie van inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen, een review van de manier waarop
inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen gemeten werd vooral in onderwijskundig onderzoek, en
het doorontwikkelen van een meetinstrument voor vragenlijsten dat inter-persoonlijk
vertrouwen van leraren in hun lerarenteam en direct leidinggevende meet. De
overige drie studies zijn kwantitatieve studies gebaseerd op de data van 884
(respectievelijk 845, hoofdstuk 5) leraren van 10 roc’s, geanalyseerd met structural
equation modeling. Deze studies richten zich op de relatie tussen high-commitment
HRM, specifiek structurele empowerment van leraren (hoofdstuk 3), de relatie tussen
de structuur van een school en de psychologische afstand van leraren van hun direct
leidinggevende en hoger management en twee aspecten van HRM, namelijk
participatie in het nemen van beslissingen en topdown communicatie (hoofdstuk 4),
en de relatie tussen het klimaat van een school en de sociale ruil relatie van leraren
met hun school (hoofdstuk 5). Verder richten zich deze studies op de samenhang
tussen het vertrouwen van leraren in (leden) van hun school en hun zelfredzaamheid
(hoofdstuk 3), affectieve betrokkenheid bij de school en taakoverstijgend gedrag
(hoofdstukken 4 en 5).
Resultaten
Conceptualisatie en meten van inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen:
De review en analyse (hoofdstuk 2) van de conceptualisatie en het meten van
vertrouwen laten zien dat, ondanks het grote aantal aan verschillende
conceptualisaties van inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen, organisatiekundig onderzoek in
toenemende mate erover eens blijkt te zijn dat inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen twee
elementen bevat: positieve verwachtingen over de intenties of het gedrag van een
Dutch Summary _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
181
persoon/groep en de bereidheid om zichzelf kwetsbaar op te stellen/ een risico in te
gaan in de relatie met de andere persoon/groep. In theorie kunnen de antecedenten
van vertrouwen in vijf categorieën samengevat worden: de geneigdheid om te
vertrouwen van de trustor, de eigenschappen van de trustee die zijn/haar
betrouwbaarheid bepalen, de aard en kwaliteit van de relatie van de trustor en de
trustee, macroniveau indicaties, en domein- en situatieafhankelijke factoren (Dietz &
Den Hartog, 2006). De manier waarop inter-persoonlijk vertrouwen gemeten wordt is
zeer verschillend en de meetinstrumenten hebben verschillende tekortkomingen,
zoals een gebrek aan (bewijs voor) constructvaliditeit. In onderwijskundig onderzoek
is het meten van vertrouwen van leraren minder uiteenlopend, omdat de meeste
studies gebruik hebben gemaakt van het originele of licht aangepaste
meetinstrument van Hoy en Tschannen-Moran (1999, 2003). Ondanks de goede
interne validiteit, heeft ook dit instrument sommige beperkingen. Vijf andere
meetinstrumenten voor vertrouwen, die in onderwijskundig onderzoek gebruikt
werden, zijn geïdentificeerd en geanalyseerd. Echter, geen van deze instrumenten
past bij de recente conceptualisatie van vertrouwen, zoals toegepast in dit
proefschrift. Dus werd een kwalitatief hoogwaardig meetinstrument (van Gillespie,
2003) verder ontwikkeld en empirisch getoetst om het vertrouwen van leraren van
roc’s in hun lerarenteam en direct leidinggevende te meten. Dit instrument blijkt een
goede betrouwbaarheid en theoretische als ook empirische constructvaliditeit te
hebben.
De relatie tussen organisatiekenmerken en het vertrouwen van leraren:
Het vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam blijkt positief samen te hangen met
taakgerelateerde en leergerelateerde samenwerking van leraren. Verder blijken
sommige aspecten van structurele empowerment van leraren hun vertrouwen in het
lerarenteam te bevorderen. Dit gebeurd via samenwerking. Specifiek blijken
participatie in het nemen van onderwijsgerelateerde beslissingen en de
mogelijkheden voor professionele ontwikkeling positief samen te hangen met het
vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam via een toename van leergerelateerde
samenwerking en blijken participatie in het nemen van onderwijsgerelateerde en
financiële beslissingen, de mogelijkheden voor professionele ontwikkeling en
teamautonomie in administratieve taken positief samen te hangen met het
vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam via een toename van taakgerelateerde
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
182
samenwerking (hoofdstuk 3). Verder blijkt een ondersteunend klimaat positief samen
te hangen met het vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam (hoofdstuk 5).
Het vertrouwen van leraren in de direct leidinggevende blijkt positief samen te
hangen met structurele empowerment van leraren, specifiek met de mogelijkheden
voor professionele ontwikkeling en teamautonomie in administratieve taken
(hoofdstuk 3). Een rechtvaardig en ondersteunend klimaat en taakgerelateerde
samenwerking van leraren blijken ook het vertouwen van leraren in hun direct
leidinggevende te bevorderen (hoofdstukken 3 en 5). Als de leraar andere
werkgerelateerde waarden (psychologische afstand) heeft dan de direct
leidinggevende, blijkt zijn/haar vertrouwen in de direct leidinggevende af te nemen;
participatie in het nemen van onderwijsgerelateerde beslissingen en voldoende en
open topdown communicatie blijken de door de leraren gevoelde psychologische
afstand van de direct leidinggevende te verminderen (hoofdstuk 4).
Het vertrouwen van leraren in het hoger management blijkt positief samen te
hangen met sommige aspecten van structurele empowerment van leraren, specifiek
met de participatie van leraren in het nemen van financiële beslissingen, de
mogelijkheden voor professionele ontwikkeling en teamautonomie in
onderwijskundige taken (hoofdstuk 3). Bovendien blijken een rechtvaardig en
ondersteunend klimaat en taakgerelateerde samenwerking van leraren een positief
verband te hebben met het vertrouwen van leraren in het hoger management
(hoofdstukken 3 en 5), terwijl de door de leraren gevoelde verschillen in
werkgerelateerde waarden (psychologische afstand) met het hoger management het
vertrouwen van leraren in hoger management blijken te verminderen; participatie in
het nemen van onderwijsgerelateerde en financiële beslissingen en voldoende en
open topdown communicatie blijken de door de leraren gevoelde psychologische
afstand van hoger management te verminderen (hoofdstuk 4).
De relatie tussen het vertrouwen van leraren en hun attitudes en gedrag:
De resultaten laten zien dat het vertrouwen van leraren positief samen blijkt te
hangen met zelfredzaamheid, affectieve betrokkenheid (AB) bij de school en
taakoverstijgend gedrag (TOG) van leraren. De trustee blijkt daarbij van bijzonder
belang te zijn omdat alleen het vertrouwen van leraren in hun lerarenteam de
onderzochte attitudes en het onderzochte gedrag blijkt te beïnvloeden. Het
vertrouwen van leraren in hun lerarenteam blijkt samen te hangen met hun
Dutch Summary _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
183
zelfredzaamheid, terwijl het vertrouwen van leraren in management er niet mee
samen blijkt te hangen (hoofdstuk 3). Hoewel het vertrouwen van leraren positief
samen blijkt te hangen met AB, TOG tegenover collega’s en TOG betreffende
informatie, en het vertrouwen van leraren in hoger management met TOG (hoofdstuk
4), blijkt dit verband te verdwijnen wanneer het vertrouwen van leraren in het
lerarenteam tegelijk onderzocht wordt (hoofdstuk 5). In de studie gepresenteerd in
hoofdstuk 5, hangt alleen het vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam positief
samen met AB, TOG tegenover collega’s en TOG betreffende informatie. Dit wijst
erop, dat naast eigenschappen van de trustee, ook eigenschappen van de trustor
zelf, zoals zijn/haar geneigdheid om te vertrouwen en macroniveau indicaties,
samenhangen met AB en TOG. TOG betreffende extra taken blijkt helemaal niet
samen te hangen met vertrouwen van leraren noch in het lerarenteam noch in
management (hoofdstukken 4 en 5).
De rol van vertrouwen in de sociale ruil relatie tussen leraren en de school:
De resultaten laten zien dat het vertrouwen van leraren een bemiddelende rol blijkt te
spelen in de relatie tussen verschillende organisatiekenmerken en de attitudes en het
gedrag van leraren. Hoe dan ook, in relatie tot de attitudes en het gedrag van leraren
onderzocht in dit proefschrift, blijkt alleen het vertrouwen van leraren in het
lerarenteam van belang te zijn. Het vertrouwen van leraren in hun lerarenteam speelt
een bemiddelende rol in de relatie tussen verschillende organisatiekenmerken en
zelfredzaamheid, affectieve betrokkenheid bij de school en taakoverstijgend gedrag
van leraren. De resultaten laten zien (hoofdstuk 5) dat de relatie tussen een
ondersteunend klimaat en het taakoverstijgend gedrag van leraren (tegenover
collega’s en betreffende informatie) bemiddeld blijkt te worden door het vertrouwen
van leraren in het lerarenteam. De relatie tussen een ondersteunend klimaat en
affectieve betrokkenheid van leraren blijkt voor een deel bemiddeld te worden door
het vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam. Bovendien, blijkt het vertrouwen van
leraren in het lerarenteam de relatie tussen sommige aspecten van structurele
empowerment van leraren en hun zelfredzaamheid te bemiddelen. Specifiek blijken
participatie in het nemen van onderwijsgerelateerde beslissingen en de
mogelijkheden voor professionele ontwikkeling samen te hangen met de
zelfredzaamheid van leraren via hun vertrouwen in het lerarenteam en een toename
van leer- en taakgerelateerde samenwerking. Participatie in het nemen van financiële
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
184
beslissingen en teamautonomie in administratieve taken blijken samen te hangen
met de zelfredzaamheid van leraren via hun vertrouwen in het lerarenteam en een
toename van taakgerelateerde samenwerking (hoofdstuk 3).
Conclusies & discussie
Deze studie indiceert dat scholen het vertrouwen van leraren in de school kunnen
vergroten door het implementeren van een organisatiestructuur, -klimaat en human
resource management dat laat zien dat leraren vertrouwd en gewaardeerd worden.
Waarschijnlijk is het vertrouwen van leraren in alle medewerkers van de school
bevorderlijk voor de school, maar in roc’s blijkt de affectieve betrokkenheid en het
taakoverstijgend gedrag van leraren vooral beïnvloed te worden door het vertrouwen
van leraren in het lerarenteam. Dit zou te maken kunnen hebben met de context van
deze studie. Een teamgerichte structuur en grote spans of control zouden de invloed
van het management op het oordeel van leraren over de school kunnen beperken en
de betekenis van het lerarenteam voor hun betrokkenheid bij de school en
taakoverstijgend gedrag kunnen vergroten. De resultaten benadrukken de waarde
die vertrouwen van leraren in het lerarenteam heeft voor het goed functioneren van
de school. Hoewel vele van de bronnen van het vertrouwen tussen leraren buiten de
invloed van het school management liggen, laat deze studie verschillende manieren
zien hoe scholen condities kunnen scheppen, die vertrouwen en sociale ruil tussen
leraren stimuleren, zoals het bevorderen van samenwerking door structurele
empowerment van leraren en een ondersteunend klimaat. Het is aan te nemen dat
teamgebaseerde structuren met veel autonomie voor lerarenteams en grote spans of
control bevorderlijk zijn voor het ontstaan van sociale ruil relaties en vertrouwen
tussen leraren. Tegelijk, en in combinatie met een toename in de grootte van roc’s en
meer bedrijfsmatig leiderschap, zou dit een drempel kunnen vormen voor de
ontwikkeling van sociale ruil relaties tussen leraren en het management.
Desalniettemin hoeft dit geen beperking te zijn zolang het gedrag van leraren in lijn is
met de doelstellingen van de school. De resultaten van deze studie laten zien, dat
bijvoorbeeld ook de participatie van leraren in het nemen van beslissingen hun
Dutch Summary _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
185
verantwoordelijkheidsgevoel om de doelstellingen van de school te halen blijkt te
vergroten en hen blijkt te motiveren een stapje extra te doen voor de school.
Publications and Contributions of Co-authors _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
187
Publications and Contributions of Co-authors Chapter 2
Thomsen, M., Karsten, S., & Oort, F. J. (submitted). Measuring teacher’s trust within
schools: A review and analyses of the conceptualization and measurement of
interpersonal trust and further development of a measurement instrument for school
settings. Contributions:
Maren Thomsen designed the study, carried out the literature search, collected and
analyzed the data and wrote the paper. Sjoerd Karsten and Frans Oort reviewed the
paper.
Chapter 3
Thomsen, M., Karsten, S., & Oort, F. J. (submitted). Structural teacher empowerment
to enhance teacher’s trust within schools: Linkages with collaboration and self-
efficacy.
Contributions:
Maren Thomsen designed the study, collected and analyzed the data and wrote the
paper. Sjoerd Karsten contributed to the content of the study and reviewed the paper.
Frans Oort contributed to the statistical analyses and reviewed the paper.
Chapter 4
Thomsen, M., Karsten, S., & Oort, F. J. (2016). Distance in schools: the influence of
psychological and structural distance from management on teachers’ trust in
management, organisational commitment, and organisational citizenship behavior.
School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 27(4), 594-612.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
188
Contributions:
Maren Thomsen designed the study, collected and analyzed the data and wrote the
paper. Sjoerd Karsten contributed to the content of the study and reviewed the paper.
Frans Oort contributed to the statistical analyses and reviewed the paper.
Chapter 5
Thomsen, M., Karsten, S., & Oort, F. J. (2015). Social exchange in Dutch schools for
vocational education and training: The role of teachers’ trust in colleagues, the
supervisor and higher management. Educational Management Administration &
Leadership 2015, 43(5), 755-771.
Contributions:
Maren Thomsen designed the study, collected and analyzed the data and wrote the
paper. Sjoerd Karsten contributed to the content of the study and reviewed the paper.
Frans Oort contributed to the statistical analyses and reviewed the paper.
Conference contributions
Thomsen, M. (2011, August). Trust and social exchange in Dutch schools for senior
secondary vocational education, paper presented at the conference of the
Junior Researchers of the European Association for Research on Learning
and Instruction in Exeter, United Kingdom.
Thomsen, M. (2011, September). Measuring interpersonal trust in schools: Further
development and validation of an instrument, paper presented at the
conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and
Instruction in Exeter, United Kingdom.
Thomsen, M. (2012, April). Distance in schools: The influence of distance on
teacher’s trust in management, organizational commitment and organizational
citizenship behavior, paper presented at the International Conference on
Interpersonal Relationships in Education in Vancouver, Canada.
Thomsen, M. (2012, April). The Influence of distance in schools on teachers’ trust in
management, commitment, and citizenship behavior, paper presented at the
Publications and Contributions of Co-authors _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
189
Annual Meeting of the American Research Association in Vancouver, Canada.
Thomsen, M. (2012, November). Structural team empowerment in schools, paper
presented at the ICO International Fall School, November, 5-10, 2012, Girona,
Spain.
Thomsen, M. (2013, January). Does structural team empowerment affect teacher’s
trust and citizenship behavior? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of
the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement in
Santiago, Chile.
Other publications
Honingh, M. & Thomsen, M. (2011). Kiezen moet! Wat doen met de
contractactiviteiten?, Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsrecht en
Onderwijsbeleid, 23 (3), 178-194.
Moerkamp, T., Hermanussen, J., Groenenberg, R. Visser, K., Thomsen, M.,
Streefland, F., & Oosterhof, A. (2011). Personeelsbeleid in het middelbaar
beroepsonderwijs [Human resource management in vocational education].
Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Dankwoord _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
191
Dankwoord
Toen ik voor dit project tekende had ik niet gedacht dat het zo’n lange rit zou worden.
Het liep niet altijd op rolletjes, maar ik heb er geen moment spijt van gehad dat ik
deze weg heb gekozen. Ik kijk terug op een zeer leerzame, inspirerende en leuke
periode, waar ik niet alleen inhoudelijk veel geleerd heb, maar ook over mezelf.
Graag wil ik diegene bedanken die hieraan hebben bijgedragen.
Dit proefstuk draait om vertrouwen en vertrouwen is ook wat ik heb gekregen
tijdens dit promotieonderzoek, vooral van mijn promotoren Sjoerd en Frans. Daarvoor
wil ik jullie van harte bedanken! Ik was er altijd zeker van dat jullie er vertrouwen in
hadden dat het uiteindelijk goed zou komen, ook toen ik er zelf wat minder
vertrouwen in had…Sjoerd, je deur stond altijd open en dat was heel erg fijn! Frans,
je nam altijd tijd voor me en mijn (statistische) vragen. Zonder jullie vertrouwen, steun
en aanmoedigingen was dit boek niet tot stand gekomen. Heel erg bedankt!
Ik ben ook dank verschuldigd aan de vele docenten, die aan dit onderzoek
deelgenomen hebben. Zonder hun medewerking en openhartigheid had dit
onderzoek niet uitgevoerd kunnen worden.
Ook wil ik al mijn voormalige collega’s van het ecbo bedanken! De
inhoudelijke discussies en onze samenwerking waren erg prettig en leerzaam. Het
clubje uit Amsterdam wil ik bijzonder bedanken: Arjan, Eva, Ilona, Louise, Marieke,
Regina en Sjoerd, jullie hebben me een warm welkom gegeven in mijn eerste uren
van het beroepsonderwijs ! Jullie waren heel fijne collega’s en zijn erg lieve
mensen!
Ook al mijn voormalige collega’s van de UvA wil ik bedanken, mijn
kamergenootjes Ilona, Lisa, Lisette, Louise en Suzanne in het bijzonder! Jullie
hebben de tijd op de UvA gezellig gemaakt! Ik heb erg genoten van de vele
koffiemomentjes en lunches. Ook alle andere medepromovendae: dank voor jullie
gezelligheid tijdens conferenties en andere meetings! Lisa en Lisette, onze
gezamenlijke conferenties, uitjes en gesprekken hebben veel voor mij betekend.
Jullie zijn heel fijne en inspirerende collega-onderzoekers en vrienden en ik mis jullie
hier in Berlijn. Zo leuk, dat jullie mijn paranimfen willen zijn! Hartelijk dank voor jullie
steun!
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
192
Andrea, jou wil ik bedanken dat je er altijd voor me bent! Je vriendschap
betekend heel veel voor me. En Janine, vaak denk ik nog aan onze reis van Berlijn
naar Breda, toen we samen naar Nederland gingen. Toen en de hele tijd in
Nederland was ik zo blij je altijd dicht bij me te hebben! En ook nu ik weer terug ben,
ben ik erg blij jou te hebben! Ik zou je nooit willen missen!
Nadin und Biene, Ihr habt dafür gesorgt, dass ich mich gleich wieder richtig
zuhause gefühlt habe in Berlin! Danke, liebe Nadin, für Deine Freundschaft und das
Du immer für mich da bist! Und Biene, es ist so schön, dass wir im Sechsergespann
so viele tolle Ausflüge und Reisen machen! Vielleicht werden Marie und Nora ja auch
Freundinnen fürs Leben.
Meine lieben Eltern und Co-Eltern ;) vielen Dank für Eure Liebe und
Unterstützung! Zu wissen, dass Ihr für mich da seid gibt mir sehr viel Kraft! Mama,
Danke, dass Du mich immer unterstützt hast, egal welchen Weg ich gehen wollte!
Papa, Dir möchte ich dieses Buch widmen. Du hast Dich diesem Thema mit so viel
Enthusiasmus gewidmet, dass Du mich einfach nur mitreißen konntest ! Unsere
vielen Gespräche haben mich nicht nur inhaltlich weiter gebracht, sondern mich auch
enorm motiviert. Danke, dass Du Dir so viel Zeit für mich genommen hast! Das
bedeutet mir sehr viel!
Steffi, Mimi, Lisi und Freddy, Ihr seid die tollsten Geschwister, die man sich
wünschen kann! Danke, dass Ihr so seid wie ihr seid!
Liebster Olaf, danke dass Du bei mir bist! Ich bin so froh, dass ich Dich habe.
Deine Ruhe und Geduld helfen mir immer wieder das Gleichgewicht zu finden. So oft
hast Du mir während der letzten neun Jahre Mut gemacht. Ohne Dich hätte ich es nie
geschafft. Du bist mein Felsen in der Brandung! Und Du, meine liebste Nora, Du hast
mir die Kraft gegeben, dieses Buch letztendlich zu Ende zu bringen! Ich genieße
jeden Tag bei Dir zu sein, mit Dir zusammen die Welt zu entdecken und mich durch
Dein wundervolles Lachen anstecken zu lassen! Danke, dass es Dich gibt. Du bist
mein allergrößter Schatz!
Maren Thomsen
Teacher’s Trust
Measurement, Sources and Consequences of Teacher’s Interpersonal Trust
within Schools for Vocational Education and Training
Teacher’s Trust M
aren Thomsen
Uitnodiging
Voor het bijwonen van de openbare verdediging van het proefschrift
Teacher’s TrustMeasurement, Sources and Consequences of Teacher’s
Interpersonal Trust within Schools for Vocational Education and Training
op vrijdag 9 februari 2018 om 12:00 uur in de Agnietenkapel,
Oudezijds Voorburgwal 231 te Amsterdam.
Na afloop van de promotieplechtigheid bent u van harte
welkom op de receptie (inclusief lunch) in café ‘Kapitein Zeppos’,
Gebed Zonder End 5 te Amsterdam.
Maren [email protected]
ParanimfenLisa Gaikhorst
Lisette [email protected]
15226-Thomsen_R9_OMS.indd 1 20-12-17 08:40
