Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture and Teacher Satisfaction
by Elizabeth Stearns, Neena Banerjee, Stephanie Moller & Roslyn Arlin Mickelson — 2015
Background/Context: Teacher job satisfaction is critical to schools’ success. As organizations, schools need teachers who are satisfied with their jobs and who work with one another to build school community and increase student achievement. School organizational culture shapes teacher job satisfaction in many ways, but it is still unclear which facets of organizational culture have the greatest influence on teacher job satisfaction and whether some of these facets may have moderating effects on others.
Purpose of Study: This study investigates the association among two aspects of organizational culture (professional community and teacher collaboration), teacher control over school and classroom policy, and teacher job satisfaction. We use the term Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture to refer to those schools with strong norms of professional community and teacher collaboration.
Research Design: We use a nationally representative sample of U.S. kindergarten teachers from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey in 1998–1999 and hierarchical linear modeling to examine the association between aspects of school organizational culture and teacher job satisfaction.
Findings: We find that professional community, collaboration, and teacher control are predictive of satisfaction and they also have interactive influences. The association between teacher collaboration and job satisfaction, as well as that between control over classroom policy and job satisfaction, is most pronounced in schools with weaker professional communities.
Recommendations: Future reform efforts that foster greater professional communities, teacher collaboration, and control over classrooms can exist alongside more conventional reforms such as raising curricular standards and instituting greater accountability. Fostering a strong teacher pedagogical culture will help to bolster teacher job satisfaction.
THE ROLE OF COLLECTIVE PEDAGOGICAL TEACHER CULTURE IN TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION
In the current educational climate in the United States, teachers are under a great deal of public pressure that focuses on raising students test scores (Crocco & Costigan, 2006; Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2002; Nichols & Berliner, 2007). Reform efforts over the years have emphasized the need for teacher accountability. There is, however, a general consensus that without a satisfied and committed teacher workforce, substantive changes through reform will be challenging because teachers are also the implementers of reforms (Ma & MacMillan, 1999). As a result, policy makers look for ways to improve teachers job satisfaction in schools.
As organizations, schools need teachers who are satisfied with their jobs and who work with one another to build school community and increase student achievement. In fact, studies have found a strong relationship between work environment of teachers, teacher job satisfaction, and student achievement (Hall, Pearson, & Carroll, 1992; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Johnson, Kraft, & Papay, 2012; NCES-AIR, 1997). Dissatisfied teachers may undermine educational goals, and dissatisfaction with teaching conditions may lead to higher teacher absenteeism, stress, and turnover (Perrachione, Rosser, & Peterson, 2008; Renzulli, Parrott, & Beattie, 2011). Attrition rates are particularly high among math and science teachers, new teachers, and teachers of color (Achinstein, Ogawa, Sexton, & Freitas, 2010; Borman & Dowling, 2008; Ingersoll, 2001a; Ingersoll & Connor, 2009). Since teacher dissatisfaction is strongly associated with higher turnover, it poses significant challenges to the effectiveness of school reform efforts (Lortie, 1975; Renzulli et al., 2011).
While many factors may influence the extent to which teachers are satisfied with their jobs, one factor that is of particular interest to those in educational leadership positions and other policy makers is the organizational culture of the school. This interest in organizational culture stems from its malleability to policy intervention. Schools organizational cultures are critical because they define how teachers interact with one another and their students (Powers, 2009). In fact, several studies have suggested that the organizational culture of schools can have important implications for teaching practices and teacher job satisfaction (Gamoran, Secada, & Marrett, 2000; Lee, Dedrick, & Smith, 1991; Lee & Smith, 1996; Louis & Marks, 1998; Perrachione et al., 2008; Renzulli et al., 2011; Weiss, 1999). There is also a strong association between some aspects of teachers' job conditions, such as the amount of control they have over classroom and school policies, and their job satisfaction (Ingersoll, 2001b; Ingersoll & Connor, 2009). It is still, however, unclear which facets of organizational culture have the greatest influence on teacher job satisfaction and whether some of these facets may have moderating effects on others.
In this study, we examine the influence of organizational culture on teacher job satisfaction with rigorous quantitative methods, using a nationally representative sample of kindergarten teachers in the United States. We focus on what we term Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture, a type of organizational culture that is comprised of teachers' perceptions of (1) the strength of professional community and (2) the extent of teacher collaboration present in their schools. We hypothesize that professional community and teacher collaboration are positively associated with teachers job satisfaction. Additionally, we hypothesize that professional community and teacher collaboration moderate the influence of some other facets of organizational culture, such as control over classroom policy, that have been found to be associated with teacher job satisfaction.
There are several factors that directly and indirectly influence teachers job satisfaction. While early research focused more on teacher demographics and individual characteristics (Ma & MacMillan, 1999), a growing body of recent research and surveys indicates that workplace environment is a more important predictor of job satisfaction, net of teacher background characteristics and compensation (Hirsch, 2005; Hirsch & Church, 2009; Hirsch & Emerick, 2007; Ladd, 2011; Liu & Meyer, 2005; Ma & MacMillan, 1999; NCES-AIR, 1997; Pfeffer, 1983; Rosenholtz & Simpson, 1990).
Two components of the workplace environment are particularly relevant: teacher control over classroom policies and the schools culture. Control over classroom policies encompasses the policies that govern the ways that teachers interact with students. Teachers who have a greater level of such control tend to have higher levels of job satisfaction (Bronfenbrenner, 1976; Ingersoll, 2003). Empowerment of teachers by giving them greater control over classroom and school policy decisions can lead to greater job satisfaction and less job stress through various direct and indirect channels. Teachers stand to benefit collectively as professionals when greater autonomy is incorporated into the teaching profession (Blasé & Kirby, 2000; Ingersoll, 1997; Pearson & Moomaw, 2005). The perception of a teaching career as a rewarding and respectable profession motivates both novice and experienced teachers to have greater commitment to the profession. Greater autonomy can also indirectly influence teachers job satisfaction levels by transforming the work environment within school (Pearson & Moomaw, 2005). Teachers are more likely to feel motivated when they can influence decision making on matters they engage on a regular basis such as textbook selection, curriculum design, selection of teaching strategies, and student discipline. Greater autonomy in matters related to teacher professional development and training can also motivate teachers to become effective educators to students (Ingersoll, 2003).
Workplace conditions can also affect teachers job satisfaction. The school cultural environment shapes how teachers perceive themselves as contributors to the whole school (Lortie, 1975). As opposed to schools with a well-entrenched culture of isolation and individualism, schools that demonstrate a culture of collegiality and collaboration provide an environment where teachers resolve issues easily and continually assess new teaching tools. This enhances professional competence and ultimately creates a more satisfied, committed, and professionally involved teacher workforce (Hargreaves, 1994; Leithwood, Leonard, & Sharratt, 1998; Ma & MacMillan, 1999; Rosenholtz, 1989). In fact, teachers identify the need for effective school community, defined as having a collegial atmosphere and sense of community as a primary factor that enables them to meet personal, instructional and organizational needs (Moore-Johnson, 1990).
Empirical studies have shown a strong and established link between various aspects of organizational culture and teacher job satisfaction (Culver, Wolfle, & Cross, 1990; Lee et al., 1991; Ma & MacMillan, 1999; Perrachione et al., 2008; Renzulli et al., 2011; Reyes & Pounder, 1993; Weiss, 1999). For example, Lee et al. (1991) found that the strongest predictor of teacher satisfaction among high school teachers was what they termed "community." Others have found similar results: Ma and MacMillan (1999) discovered that organizational culture, which they defined in terms of collegiality, or the extent to which teachers perceived themselves and other teachers as sharing positive attitudes in general and attitudes toward how children learn, played an important role in predicting teacher satisfaction. In fact, Ma and MacMillan (1999) found that teacher demographics, although associated with satisfaction, were less important predictors of job satisfaction than were teachers' perceptions of the climate within the school. These results regarding the relative impact of teacher demographics and organizational culture on teacher job satisfaction echoed those of Culver, Wolfle, and Cross (1990) and Weiss (1999). There is, however, little consensus regarding which aspects of organizational culture are most closely associated with teacher job satisfaction.
In the section that follows, we lay out our conceptualization of organizational culture within schools and detail how it relates to teacher job satisfaction. Specifically, we study the extent of what we term Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture, which encompasses professional community of the school and the ways in which teachers interact with one another with regard to collaboration. As such, Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture is a component of schools organizational culture. We examine how it moderates the relationship between an important dimension of teacher autonomyteacher control over classroom policiesand teacher satisfaction.
SCHOOLS ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
The culture of an organization, including its shared assumptions, rituals, values, climate, and behaviors, defines the organization (Schein, 2010). Values and norms shape interactions and expectations, and they are essential to internal control systems for an organization (Black, 2003; Pedersen & Dobbin, 2006; Schein, 2010). In schools, there are multiple layers through which culture diffuses. The school administrators and leaders are typically responsible for generating the cultural values within the school, but teachers must consent to, promote, and enact these values (Kruse & Louis, 2009; Schein, 2010). Effective and transformational leadership that is based on open communication between school leaders and teachers is essential to guide the process of generating shared cultural values and to ensure teachers commitment to those values (Jantzi & Leithwood, 1993; Ladd, 2011; Leithwood, 1994; Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001).
Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture
We build on the existing literature by positing that schools with a certain type of organizational culture that we term Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture are the most effective at promoting high levels of teacher satisfaction with their jobs. We conceptualize Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture as a culture where teachers perceive (1) a value of strong professional community and (2) a norm of collaboration among teachers where the needs of students are centralized. This is a concept we have used elsewhere (Moller, Mickelson, Stearns, Banerjee, & Bottia, 2013; Stearns, Banerjee, Mickelson, & Moller, 2014).
Professional community. Much of the research that contributes to our understanding of the organizational culture of schools has focused on professional communities. The exact definition of these communities varies across studies, but common elements include: a shared sense of purpose for the school that is spearheaded by a visionary leadership; a sense of belonging, trust, and spirit among teachers and between school leadership and teachers; common focus on student learning; collaboration in the development of curriculum and instruction; sharing practices; reflective dialogue among teachers with respect to student learning; and continuous professional development for ongoing teacher learning (Gamoran, Gunter, & Williams, 2005; Kruse & Louis, 2009; Louis, Marks, & Kruse, 1996; Stoll, Bolam, McMahon, Wallace, & Thomas, 2006). As such, we include professional community as a key component of Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture.
In our conceptualization of professional community, cultural strength is an important dimension because a strong, coherent culture prevents subcultures from undermining the mission of the organization (Schein, 2010). Indeed, shared understanding and acceptance of the organizations mission is the basic foundation of any culture; an organizations espoused values are only components of culture if they are consensually understood (Schein, 2010).
There is a general understanding that professional communities cultivate culture by creating shared languages, values, and expectations among teachers and administrators (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2006).1 Within schools, it is often the principal or a leadership team comprised of the principal and several school faculty (shared leadership) that guide the process of identifying the goals and developing organizational mission and vision in a shared manner involving all faculty. The greater the involvement of the faculty and the level of agreement on the mission among them, the stronger the culture. The culture is also more community-oriented if teachers feel accepted and respected by each other as colleagues and if they have a sense of pride or spirit, such that teachers who are thoroughly socialized into community-oriented school culture (both professional and collegial) have a sense of belonging, attachment, and pride (Anderson, 1982; Keefe & Howard, 1997; Wynne, 1980).
An important attribute of professional communities within schools is an orientation toward organizational/collective learning. The term professional learning communities emerged as shorthand among practitioners to capture this close association between professional community and organizational/collective learning (Scribner, 1999; Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). Scholars have suggested that professional communities are most effective when teachers are continually learning and searching for methods to enhance their effectiveness (Little, 1982; McLaughlin & Talbert, 2006; Patchen, 2004; Smey-Richman, 1991; Yasumoto, Uekawa, & Bidwell, 2001). Such learning frequently involves sustained collaboration to develop a common understanding of concepts and practices that complements what teachers bring individually to their classrooms (Bryk, Camburn, & Louis, 1999; Stoll et al., 2006; Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). In essence, schools that focus on organizational learning may also provide an atmosphere where teachers are more collaborative (Gamoran et al., 2000). The nature of school leadership is equally important for creating those necessary conditions and opportunities for sustained collaboration through allocation of time and effective school policies (Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). Thus, we contend that teachers sense that they are part of strong professional communities when they perceive that there is an agreed upon mission, school pride, open communication with leadership, trust and collegial relationship among teachers, an orientation toward collective learning, and a sense of belonging.
Teacher collaboration. This leads to the second main component of Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture: a norm of teacher collaboration. Collaboration reflects an environment where teachers build their lessons and curriculum cooperatively and meet to talk about progress in student learning in their schools. This collaboration allows teachers to eliminate redundancy in and increase compatibility across parts of the curriculum, to take collective responsibility for student learning, and to interactively develop the best strategy for teaching (Lee & Smith, 1996; Louis & Marks, 1998; McLaughlin & Talbert, 2006). Since the 1980s, research has highlighted teacher collaboration as an essential precondition for school improvement, with foundational papers calling for an end to workplace conditions that promoted isolation and uncertainty in the name of self-reliance and individualism that was inherent in teaching. These studies celebrated the value of joint/shared work among teachers and documented the many benefits attributed to teacher collaboration such as providing moral support, helping teachers become more confident, efficient, and effective, reducing workloads, setting boundaries of their tasks, and promoting teacher and student learning and thereby contributing to sustained school improvement (Hargreaves, 1994; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Kelchtermans, 2006; Little, 1982; Little, 1990; Lortie, 1975; Rosenholtz, 1989; Smylie, 1994). Organizational cultures that fail to promote collaboration instead encourage teacher isolation, which contributes to teacher dissatisfaction (Hargreaves, 1994; Leithwood et al., 1998; Rosenholtz, 1990).
The above benefits, however, are not automatically achieved by teacher collaboration, but depend on the value and recognition that is placed on collaborative work and the opportunities that are created through adequate allocation of time, monetary resources and human assistance for actual collaboration to take place (Kelchtermans, 2006; Little, 1990). Professional communities may lay the foundation for teachers to learn from each other through collective understanding as opposed to individualized, fragmented understanding and teaching (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2006). Yet, a sense of community among teachers may not necessarily translate into collaborative teaching (Little, 1982; Little, 1990; Moller et al., 2013). Collaboration must be one of the norms guiding the community.
Given this connectedness between the two concepts of collaboration and professional community, many studies incorporate collaboration in the definition of professional communities. Yet we contend that teachers may perceive that the school has a strong professional community even if they do not collaborate on lessons. In making this point, we draw upon Littles (1990) foundational work in distinguishing four different forms of community, which she defined in terms of collegial relations and placed on a continuum from independence to interdependence (Keltchermans, 2006, p. 224). Only one of those four types of community is characterized by joint work based on shared responsibilities for teaching and nonteaching duties. This form of collegial relationship emerges only when teachers undertake actual collaborative activities beyond just talking and discussing and requires absolute interdependence among them (Kelchtermans, 2006). Littles (1990) work has been expanded by Hargreaves (1994) and Achinstein (2002) to illustrate the complexities and conflicts that underlie the association between collaboration and professional community.2
The presence of professional community can sometimes inhibit collaboration as well. Teachers are less likely to consider conflicting perspectives on difficult but important issues when friendship ties among them are at stake (Avila de Lima, 2001). Staessens (1993) termed such schools as family schools because the informal culture of congeniality and collegial bonding that is effectively managed in such schools often deters attempts to bring difficult but critical reforms. A similar argument was made by Hargreaves (1994) who found that schools often embrace collaboration that is conformist, cozy, safe, and comfortable and avoid real collaboration in classroom practices and systematic shared reflection. Although it maintains collegial bonding, such collaboration fails to usher in teacher professional learning or bring positive changes in school culture (Sato & Kleinsasser, 2004). At times, collaboration can in fact be efficiently managed in order to silence any dissenting voices and to keep the team in line (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Kelchtermans, 2006). Rather than assuming that collaboration is part and parcel of professional communities, we test whether these structural features of schools coincide, as we describe below.
We hypothesize that Collective Pedagogical Teacher Culture (defined by strong professional communities and norms of collaboration) is needed to promote teacher job satisfaction. Following Lee et al. (1991), we also hypothesize that these factors will moderate the impact of control over classroom policy on teacher job satisfaction. More specifically, we hypothesize that the association between the amount of control they exercise over classroom policy and teacher job satisfaction will be weaker in schools with stronger professional communities and more collaboration. We focus on teachers values and norms because they are quantifiable components of culture (Schein, 2010).
METHODS AND DATA DESCRIPTION
Notes: a. Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood; b. One factor extracted with three iterations.
Notes: a. Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood; b. Two factors extracted with five iterations.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
2. We recognize that effective and sustained collaboration among teachers may also depend on several conditions apart from the presence of a strong professional community in schools. For example, teachers are less likely to spontaneously collaborate in schools where professional communities, although present, are based on compliance, and implementation-oriented rather than respect for diversity of opinions (Hargreaves, 1994; Kelchtermans, 2006; Leonard, 2002) or where professional communities promote individualism rather than collectivism (Achinstein, 2002). This may also be the case where school leadership does not believe that the time spent on collaboration is worthwhile (Leonard, 2002). Lastly, certain structural features of schools, including school enrollment and level of teacher racial/ethnic diversity, likely enhance or undermine true collaboration among teachers (Achinstein, 2002; Leonard, 2002).
3. New teachers who joined the school after fall 1998 were included in the census of teachers that was conducted in the spring of 1999.
4. Part A of the teacher questionnaire asked teachers about their classroom characteristics including the racial and ethnic composition of children in each class. In Part B, teachers were asked about various aspects of the school environment within which they work. Part B of the teacher questionnaire also contained information about teachers demographic and educational backgrounds. A third part (Part C) of the questionnaire was given only to teachers who have taught a sampled child.
5. The EFA is conducted with an oblique rotation (promax). Oblique rotation method is favored over orthogonal rotation method because unlike orthogonal rotation, which assumes factors to be uncorrelated, oblique rotation method allows factors to be correlated (Conway & Huffcutt, 2003; Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, & Strahan, 1999).
6. To further examine the robustness of the factors, we tested the two-factor solution through confirmatory factor analysis. We fit models with goodness of fit and CFI indices above .98 and RMSEA below .06. The results from the EFA and CFA were used to create factor scores. The EFA and CFA scores are correlated above .97 in each time period for the first factor, and they are correlated above .9 for the second factor. This suggests that the factor scores created from the EFA represent constructs that fit the data well.
7. In separate analyses (not shown) we test our models with additional control variables such as percentage of students in a teachers class who identify themselves as African-Americans or Latino/a, percentage of students in a teachers class who are identified as limited proficient in English (LEP). We also include control variable such as teachers age, teachers with masters or more educational qualification, number of hours the teacher teaches per day, whether a school provides incentives to its teachers, and whether a school has adequate safety measures in place. Tables with results from these models are available from the authors upon request.
Achinstein, B. (2002). Conflict amid community: The micropolitics of teacher collaboration. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 421455.
Achinstein, B., Ogawa, R. T., Sexton, D., & Freitas, C. (2010). Retaining teachers of color: A pressing problem and a potential strategy for "hard-to-staff" schools. Review of Educational Research, 80(1), 71107.
Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Anderson, C. S. (1982). The search for school climate: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 52(3), 368-420.
Avila de Lima, J. (2001). Forgetting about friendship: Using conflict in teacher communities as a catalyst for school change. Journal of Educational Change, 2, 97122.
Bidwell, C. E., Frank, K. A., & Quiroz, P. A. (1997). Teacher types, workplace controls, and the organization of schools. Sociology of Education, 70(4), 285307.
Bizar, M., & Barr, R. (2001). School leadership in times of urban reform. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Black, R. J. (2003). Organisational culture: Creating the influence needed for strategic success. London: Dissertation.com.
Blasé, J. J., & Kirby, P. C. (2000). Bringing out the best in teachers: What effective principals do (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367409.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303333.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1976). Experimental ecology of education. Teachers College Record, 78(2), 157204.
Bryk, A., Camburn, E., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(5), 751781.
Bryk, A., & Raudenbush, S. (1997). Hierarchical linear models. Newbury Park: Sage.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., Hilger, N., Saez, E., Whitmore, D. S., & Yagan, D. (2011). How does your kindergarten classroom affect your earnings? Evidence from Project STAR. Quarterly Journal of Economics, CXXVI(4).
Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6(2), 147168. doi:10.1177/1094428103251541
Cooper, H., Allen, A. B., Patall, E. A., & Dent, A. L. (2010). Effects of full day kindergarten on academic achievement and social development. Review of Educational Research, 80(1), 3470.
Crocco, M. S., & Costigan, A. T. (2006). High-stakes teaching: What's at stake for teachers (and students) in the age of accountability. The New Educator, 2, 113.
Culver, S. M., Wolfle, L. M., & Cross, L. H. (1990). Testing a model of teacher satisfaction for Blacks and Whites. American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 323349.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272299.
Gamoran, A., Gunter, R., & Williams, T. (2005). Professional community by design: Building social capital through teacher professional development. In L. V. Hedges & B. Schneider (Eds.), Social organization of schooling. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Gamoran, A., Secada, W. G., & Marrett, C. B. (2000). The organizational context of teaching and learning. In M. T. Hallinan (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of education (pp. 3763). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Hall, B., Pearson, L., & Carroll, D. (1992). Teachers' long-range teaching plans: A discriminant analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 84(4), 221225.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times. Toronto: OISE Press.
Hirsch, E. (2005). Teacher working conditions are student learning conditions: A report to Governor Mike Easley on the 2004 North Carolina teacher working conditions survey. Chapel Hill, NC: Southeast Center for Teaching Quality.
Hirsch, E., & Church, K. (2009). North Carolina teacher working conditions survey brief: teacher working conditions are student learning conditions. Santa Cruz: University of California-Santa Cruz New Teacher Center.
Hirsch, E., & Emerick, S. (2007). Teacher working conditions are student learning conditions: A report on the 2006 North Carolina teacher working conditions survey. Chapel Hill, NC: Southeast Center for Teaching Quality.
Ingersoll, R. M. (1997). Teacher professionalization and teacher commitment: A multilevel analysis. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001a). The status of teaching as a profession. In J. H. Ballantine & J. Z. Spade (Eds.), Schools and society (pp. 102116). Thousand Oaks, CA: Wadsworth Press.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001b). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499534.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Who controls teachers' work: Power and accountability in America's schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Connor, R. (2009). What do the national data tell us about minority and Black teacher turnover? Paper presented at the American Education Research Association., San Diego, CA.
Jantzi, D., & Leithwood, K. (1993). Toward an explanation of variation in teachers perceptions of transformational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32, 512538.
Johnson, S. M., & Birkeland, S. E. (2003). Pursuing a "sense of success": New teachers explain their career decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 581617.
Johnson, S. M., Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers' working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students' achievement. Teachers College Record, 114(10), 139.
Kalleberg, A. (1977). Work values and job rewards: A theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42(1), 124-143.
Keefe, J. W., & Howard, E. R. (1997). Redesigning schools for the new century: A systems approach. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Kelchtermans, G. (2006). Teacher collaboration and collegiality as workplace conditions: A review. Zeitschrift fur Pedagogik, 52(2), 220237.
Kruse, S. D., & Louis, K. S. (2009). Building strong school cultures: A guide to leading change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Ladd, H. F. (2011). Teachers' perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 235261.
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 3762.
Lee, V. E., Dedrick, R. F., & Smith, J. B. (1991). The effect of the social-organization of schools on teachers efficacy and satisfaction. Sociology of Education, 64(3), 190208.
Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1996). Collective responsibility for learning and its effects on gains in achievement for early secondary school students. American Journal of Education, 104(2), 103147.
Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 498518.
Leithwood, K., Leonard, L., & Sharratt, L. (1998). Conditions fostering organizational learning in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 243276.
Leonard, L. J. (2002). Schools as professional communities: Addressing the collaborative challenge. International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning, 6(17), 113.
Little, J. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 325340.
Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers' professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91, 509536.
Liu, X. F. S., & Meyer, J. P. (2005). Teachers' perceptions of their jobs: A multilevel analysis of the teacher follow-up survey for 1994-95. Teachers College Record, 107(5), 9851003.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher - A Sociological Study. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. M. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom? Teachers' work and student experiences in restructuring schools. American Journal of Education, 106, 532575.
Louis, K. S., Marks, H. M., & Kruse, S. (1996). Teachers' professional community in restructuring schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 757798.
Ma, X., & MacMillan, R. B. (1999). Influences of workplace conditions on teachers' job satisfaction. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), 3947.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement. New York: Teachers College Press.
Moller, S., Mickelson, R. A., Stearns, E., Banerjee, N., & Bottia, M. (2013). Collective pedagogical teacher culture and mathematics achievement: Differences by race, ethnicity and socio-economic status. Sociology of Education, 86(2), 174194.
Moore-Johnson, S. (1990). Teachers at work: Achieving success in our schools. New York: Basic Books.
NCES-AIR. (1997). Job satisfaction among America's teachers: Effects of workplace conditions, background characteristics, and teacher compensation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America's schools. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 963974.
Park, I. (2005). Teacher commitment and its effects on student achievement in American high schools. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11(5), 461485.
Patchen, M. (2004). Making our schools more effective: What matters and what works. Springfield, IL: C.C. Thomas Publishers.
Pearson, L. C., & Moomaw, W. (2005). The relationship between teacher autonomy and stress, work satisfaction, empowerment, and professionalism. Educational Research Quarterly, 29(1), 3854.
Pedersen, J. S., & Dobbin, F. (2006). In search of identity and legitimation: Bridging organizational culture and neoinstitutionalism. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(7), p. 11. doi:10.1177/0002764205284798
Perrachione, B. A., Rosser, V. J., & Peterson, G. J. (2008). Why do they stay? Elementary teachers' perceptions of job satisfaction and retention. The Professional Educator, 32(2), 2541.
Pfeffer, J. (1983). Organizational demography. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 299357.
Powers, J. M. (2009). Charter schools: From reform imagery to reform reality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Renzulli, L., Parrott, H. M., & Beattie, I. R. (2011). Racial mismatch and school type: Teacher satisfaction and retention in charter and traditional public schools. Sociology of Education, 84(1), 2348.
Reyes, P., & Pounder, D. G. (1993). Organizational orientation in public and private elementary schools. The Journal of Educational Research, 87(2), 8693.
Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Workplace conditions that affect teacher quality and commitment - Implications for teacher induction-programs. Elementary School Journal, 89(4), 421439.
Rosenholtz, S. J. (1990). Teachers' workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.
Rosenholtz, S. J., & Simpson, C. (1990). Workplace conditions and the rise and fall of teacher commitment. Sociology of Education, 63, 241257.
Sato, K., & Kleinsasser, R. (2004). Beliefs, practices, and interactions of teachers in a Japanese high school English department. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 797816.
Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London: Chapman & Hall.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Scribner, J. S. (1999). Professional development: Untangling the influence of work context on teacher learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 238266.
Smey-Richman, B. (1991). School climate and restructuring for low-achieving students. Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools.
Smylie, M. (1994). Redesigning teachers' work: connections to the classroom. Review of Educational Research, 20, 129177.
Spillane, H. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 2328.
Staessens, K. (1993). Identification and description of professional culture in innovating schools. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 6, 111128.
Stearns, E., Banerjee, N., Mickelson, R. A., & Moller, S. (2014). Collective pedagogical teacher culture, teacher-student ethno-racial mismatch, and teacher job satisfaction. Social Science Research, 45, 5672.
Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 15731812.
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), 458495.
Weiss, E. M. (1999). Perceived workplace conditions and first-year teachers' morale, career choice commitment, and planned retention: A secondary analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 861879.
Wynne, E. A. (1980). Looking at schools: Good, bad, and indifferent. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Yasumoto, J. Y., Uekawa, K., & Bidwell, C. E. (2001). The collegial focus and high school students' achievement. Sociology of Education, 74(3), 181209.
APPENDIX A. MEASURES OF TEACHER SATISFACTION
1. I really enjoy my present teaching job
2. I am certain I am making a difference in the lives of the children I teach
3. If I could start over, I would choose teaching again as my career
Responses to the above three questions are captured through a five-point response scale:
1 = "STRONGLY DISAGREE"
2 = "DISAGREE"
3 = "NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE"
4 = "AGREE"
5 = "STRONGLY AGREE"
APPENDIX B. MEASURES OF COLLECTIVE PEDAGOGICAL TEACHER CULTURE
1. Teachers perception that staff have school spirit
2. Teachers perception that administrators communicate a mission
3. Teachers perception that teachers agree on school mission
4. Teacher feels accepted and respected as a colleague
5. Teacher feels that staff are continually learning and seeking new ideas.
Responses to the above three questions are captured through a five-point response scale:
1 = "STRONGLY DISAGREE"
2 = "DISAGREE"
3 = "NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE"
4 = "AGREE"
5 = "STRONGLY AGREE"
6. Frequency that teachers meet to collaborate on lesson planning
7. Frequency that teachers meet to collaborate on curriculum development
8. Frequency that teachers meet to discuss a child
Responses to the above three questions are captured through a five-point response scale:
1 = "NEVER"
2 = "ONCE A MONTH OR LESS"
3 = "TWO OR THREE TIMES A MONTH"
4 = "ONCE OR TWICE A WEEK"
5 = "THREE OR MORE TIMES A WEEK"