Transformational Leadership by D. E.S. Griffin (www.desgriffin.

com) Basic ideas of leadership are about power and its use, about control of resources, and how they are disposed, initiatives in social interpretation, sensemaking and shaping of meaning and the place of individuals in the context of social control options like the law. [1] Consideration of leadership has moved through notions about heroes, attention to traits, context and advocacy of the importance of the leader having vision. Whilst some considered leaders were born, others developed ways of training leaders. In 1990s as some continued to argue that crafting strategy was the principal task of the leader others saw that creating the climate in which followers could achieve more than their best was the main game. In the 1970s through the 80s organisations were seen to be facing the dilemma of employee commitment. [2] Jay Conger (University of Southern California) has observed that in the midst of their change efforts, companies were resorting to extensive downsizing as well as to new organisational arrangements such as flatter hierarchies and strategic business units. While often improving bottom-line performance, these initiatives took their toll on worker satisfaction and empowerment. In the process, the old social contract of long-term employment in return for employee loyalty was broken. The net result was the disenfranchising of many in the workforce. Moreover, this occurred just at the moment when corporations were demanding ever-greater performance and commitment from employees. For companies, the challenge became a question of how to orchestrate transformational change while simultaneously building employee morale and commitment, a seemingly contradictory endeavour. In the view of Conger, these events had a direct impact on the study of leadership. It turned attention to the senior leaders in the belief that they possessed the power and resources to effectively implement significant organisational change. In the late 1970s an approach to studies of leadership emerged which engaged a number of researchers in the USA and expanded to investigate the extent to which a new theory of leadership behaviour, based first on studies of politicians, could be applied internationally, was more valid in circumstances of crisis, applied to people at different levels and was true for both public and private organisations. Transformational Leadership Theory emerged from considerations by James McGregor Burns [3] of the histories of various political leaders. Burns identified two types of leadership style, transformational and transactional leadership. Transformational leaders engaged with followers and sought new ways of working so as to achieve more for both themselves and followers than they would ordinarily. Transactional leaders engaged with followers as part of an exchange process that involved tangible rewards for superior performance and mutual support. Burns drew from the literature on traits, leadership styles and research on the behaviour of leaders and followers, as well as his own observations. [4] In more detail, the transformational leader was seen as someone who engages with others in such a way that leader and follower raise one another to a higher level of motivation and morality, a

level not easily explained by traditional instrumental exchanges. These higher aspirations or goals of the collective group are expected to transcend the individual and result in the achievement of significant change in work unit effectiveness. Burns believed that all managers could be classified by leadership style according to their propensity for transactions with, versus transformation of, subordinates.The transactional leader, on the other hand, was seen as operating within the existing system or culture, had a preference for risk avoidance, paid attention to time constraints and efficiency, and generally preferred process over substance as a means for maintaining control. The skilful transactional leader was likely to be effective in stable, predictable environments where charting activity against prior performance is the most successful strategy. This leader prototype was consistent with an equitable leader-member exchange relationship where the leader fulfilled the needs of followers in exchange for performance meeting basic expectations. Bernard Bass [5], as much as anyone, has advanced Burns theories. In Bass view [6], transformational leaders seek new ways of working, seek opportunities in the face of risk, prefer effective to efficient answers and are less likely to support the status quo. Transformational leaders dont merely react to environmental circumstances, they attempt to shape and create them. They may use transactional strategies when appropriate but tend to use symbolism and imagery to solicit increased effort by raising the level of intellectual awareness about the importance of valued outcomes, by raising or expanding individual needs and by inducing a belief in transcending self-interest for the sake of the team or organisation. In 1985 Bass developed an instrument to measure both transactional and transformational leader behaviour and to investigate the nature of the relationship between these leader styles and work unit effectiveness and satisfaction. The resulting instrument, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), was conceptually developed and empirically validated to reflect the complementary dimensions of transformational and transactional leadership with sub-scales to further differentiate leader behaviour. [7] The MLQ has since acquired a history of research as the primary quantitative instrument to measure the transformational leadership construct. The MLQ has been examined in perhaps more than 100 research studies of leaders in a variety of organisational settings such as manufacturing, the military, educational and religious institutions, and at various levels in the organisation from first line supervisors to senior managers. MLQ scales have been related to a range of effectiveness criteria such as subordinate perceptions of effectiveness, as well as to a variety of organisational measures of performance like supervisory ratings, number of promotion recommendations, performance grades, percent of goals met, pass rate on exams and financial performance of the work unit. The factors, the definitions and groupings, have been through a number of changes. It is now accepted that the concept involves four factors exhibited by effective leaders.

Idealised Influence Leaders display conviction; emphasize trust; take stands on difficult issues; present their most important values; and emphasize the importance of purpose, commitment, and the ethical consequences of decision. Such leaders are admired as role models; they generate pride, loyalty, confidence, and alignment around a shared purpose.

Inspirational Motivation Leaders articulate an appealing vision of the future, challenge followers with high standards, talk optimistically and with enthusiasm, and provide encouragement and meaning for what needs to be done. Intellectual Stimulation Leaders question old assumptions, traditions, and beliefs; stimulate in others new perspectives and ways of doing things; and encourage the expression of ideas and reasons. Individualised Consideration Leaders deal with others as individuals; consider their individual needs, abilities and aspirations; listen attentively; further their development; advise; and coach. The MLQ measures a full range of leadership behaviours, including transactional leadership who may be characterised as engaging in the following behaviours: Contingent Reward Leaders engage in a constructive path-goal transaction of reward for performance. They clarify expectations, exchange promises and resources, arrange mutually satisfactory agreements, negotiate for resources, exchange assistance for effort, and provide commendations for successful follower performance. Management-by-Exception Active - leaders monitor followers performance and take corrective action if deviations from standards occur. They enforce rules to avoid mistakes. Passive - leaders fail to intervene until problems become serious. They wait to take action until mistakes are brought to their attention. Laissez Faire Leadership A non-leadership component - leaders avoid accepting their responsibilities, are absent when needed, fail to follow up requests for assistance, and resist expressing their views on important issues.

It is asserted that Transformational Leadership positively affects organisational effectiveness, revolves around relationships, which are the core of leadership, can be measured and taught, and is effective across diverse cultures and organisations. Basss conceptualisation of the transformational leader also extended the ideas of Robert House (Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania) who promoted the construct of the charismatic leader by incorporating the individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation aspects. Rather than being dependent on the leader, followers were seen as able to demonstrate free choice behaviour and develop follower autonomy within the overlay of the leaders vision. Thus, true transformational leadership requires employee empowerment, not employee dependence. The view that transformational leadership enhances organisational innovation has gained wide popularity among researchers during the past decade. [8] In summary, research has shown that leaders who display the four behaviours of transformational leadership are able to realign their followers values and norms, promote both personal and organisational changes, and help followers to exceed their initial performance expectations.

Transformational leaders go beyond exchanging contractual agreements for desired performance by

actively engaging followers personal value systems and providing ideological explanations that link followers identities to the collective identity of their organisation, thereby increasing followers intrinsic motivation (rather than just providing extrinsic motivation) to perform their job; articulating an important vision and mission for the organisation, so increasing followers understanding of the importance and values associated with desired outcomes; and raising the performance expectations of followers so increasing their willingness to transcend their self-interests for the sake of the collective entity.

Motivated people tend to prefer novel approaches to problem solving. Followers identification with the organisations vision, mission, and culture also has been linked to heightened levels of motivation toward higher levels of performance. Second, by providing intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders encourage followers to think out of the box and to adopt generative and exploratory thinking processes.

They stimulate their followers to think about old problems in new ways and encourage them to challenge their own values, traditions, and beliefs; By showing high expectations and confidence in followers capabilities, they help to develop followers commitment to long-term goals, missions, and vision and to shift their focus from short-term and immediate solutions and objectives to long-term and fundamental solutions and objectives.

A study of unconventional behaviour by leaders in stimulating creativity [9] indicates that such behaviour (e.g., standing on furniture, hanging ideas on clotheslines) significantly interacts with follower perceptions of the leader as a role model for creativity to explain follower creativity. (In other words, unconventional behaviour by leaders attracts attention and stimulates improved performance.) Results also suggest that unconventional behaviour explains variance in group cohesion above and beyond transformational leadership, and that group cohesion interacts with group intrinsic motivation to explain group creative performance. (That is to say, if leaders behave in an unusual manner, especially in groups where intrinsic motivation is high, followers are encouraged to achieve above average results.) Other examples of the link between leadership and innovation come from the articles by Rosabeth Moss Kanter on leadership and organisational turnaround and Innovation at the World Bank (see articles in Leadership). The issue of transformational leadership and research and development organisations is dealt with further in the essay on what science leadership really means. Notwithstanding the very many studies of transformational leadership that have produced important results, the morality of transformational leadership has been sharply questioned, particularly by libertarians, grass roots theorists, and organisational development consultants.

These criticisms have been addressed by arguing that to be truly transformational, leadership must be grounded in moral foundations. [10] The four components of authentic transformational leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration) are contrasted with their counterfeits in dissembling pseudotransformational leadership on the basis of (1) the moral character of the leaders and their concerns for self and others; (2) the ethical values embedded in the leaders vision, articulation, and program, which followers can embrace or reject; and (3) the morality of the processes of social ethical choices and action in which the leaders and followers engage and collectively pursue. While transactional leadership manages outcomes and aims for behavioural compliance independent of the ideals a follower may happen to have, transformational leadership is predicated upon the inner dynamics of a freely embraced change of heart in the realm of core values and motivation, upon open-ended intellectual stimulation and a commitment to treating people as ends not mere means [11]. To bring about change, authentic transformational leadership fosters the modal values of honesty, loyalty, and fairness, as well as the end values of justice, equality, and human rights One of the conclusions to be drawn from this examination of the theory is that social distance is always important to those who wish to be seen as charismatic but are in fact unethical and wish to ensure that they are not seen in that light. The credibility of the leaders suffers when the truth is stretched. Trust in the leaders is risked and trust is the single most important variable moderating the effects of transformational leadership on the performance, attitudes, and satisfaction of the followers. [12] Although distant leaders may be able to play with the truth longer than can close, immediate leaders the trust so necessary for authentic transformational leadership is lost when leaders are caught in lies, when the fantasies fail to materialize, or when hypocrisies and inconsistencies are exposed. [13] Amongst other arguments about leadership, those concerning context have been amongst the most debated. Conger observed that investigations about context and situational factors have been few. Is transformational leadership more important at certain stages of the life cycle of the organisation? Does it apply across cultures? One study which illuminates this is of a school superintendent perceived by her organisation as a charismatic leader. When she later was appointed state commissioner of education that was not how she was seen. Several essential differences were seen between the two contexts. [14] In terms of the organisational environment, the persons first context, a school district, was one in crisis whereas in the second context at the state government level there was not a similar state of distress. Authority also differed: as a superintendent she had much more control and autonomy. As commissioner, her number one priority was political loyalty to the governor. She no longer possessed the freedom to undertake actions she deemed necessary. Instead, her actions had to be cleared through the governors office. Her relationships were also different.

Whereas the district organisation had been small with limited stakeholders and localized geographically, the agency was large, complex and bureaucratic. As a result, she had little time to build the deep, personal bonds that she had established at the district level. Her impact at the state level was no longer personal and she did not come to be seen as a charismatic leader. This study might show that crisis is indeed more receptive to leadership in general and second, there are characteristics of organisations that influence an individuals latitude to take initiative and to build personal relationships that in turn shape perceptions of leadership. More latitude for initiative on the job may result in simply more opportunities to demonstrate leadership. The superintendents position allowed far more autonomy to act than the commissioners position. Closer proximity to followers may permit greater relationship building. Whereas some research shows little relationship between charismatic leadership and crises other studies have seen organisations as benefiting from charismatic leadership in times of uncertainty. This is particularly so of studies of political leadership. [15] The performance of U.S. presidents was seen by their cabinet members to be strongly related to their charisma. [16] Certainly there are differences between different cultures in terms of attributes like uncertainty avoidance, power distance, masculinity-femininity as elaborated by Hofstede [17] in his 25 years of studies of international companies including IBM. Whilst there are several attributes associated with charismatic/transformational leadership which are seen universally as contributing to outstanding leadership this does not preclude differences between cultures in ratings for those attributes; in other words the attributes likely will be enacted differently in different cultures, as shown by the GLOBE studies of Den Hartog and colleagues [18]. Attributes like motive arouser, foresight, encouraging, communicative, trustworthy, dynamic, positive, and confidence builder are endorsed as contributing to outstanding leadership. Several other charismatic attributes are perceived as culturally contingent. These include enthusiastic, risk taking, ambitious, self-effacing, unique, self-sacrificial, sincere, sensitive, compassionate, and wilful. None of the items universally perceived as impediments to outstanding leadership describe transformational/charismatic leadership. The importance of certain characteristics seems to vary with hierarchical level in the organisation. As demands, tasks and responsibilities at different hierarchical levels are quite different, it seems likely that preferred leader attributes also differ for the different levels. Effectiveness of a pattern of behaviour is in part dependent on the hierarchical level of leaders. Top-management is concerned with ends rather than means; middle management with means more than ends and supervisors are instrumental performers [19]. Thus, the implicit theory people hold regarding an effective top-manager or CEO is likely to differ from the implicit theory they hold for an effective supervisor. And followers generally regard leader effectiveness depending on their own values and preferences, those who value extrinsic rewards of work are most satisfied by relationship-oriented leaders whilst those with strong security values are particularly attracted to task-oriented leaders: in other words follower preferences for charismatic leadership are predictable on the basis of the follower values [20]

The personal view I have that transformational leadership theory is of great significance is based not only on the research conducted using the MLQ but on the substantial support for its underlying propositions found in the work of Kelloway & Barling, Metcalf & Alimo-Metcalf, Gitell (in her study of Southwest airlines and American airlines), Brown & Posner (in their study of learning and leadership), Carol and Hatakenaka (in their study of the Millstone Nuclear Power Plant - although that study merely points up the importance of building trust in management through attention to staff concerns and the involvement of staff) and a host of others including the substantial studies by Christopher Bartlett (Harvard) and Sumantra Ghoshal (London School of Economics) and Collins & Porras (Built to Last and Good to Great) and studies of the importance of conversations in relation to organisational development (referenced in this section). All these are studies which show the importance of leadership attributes very similar to the four features of transformational leadership. [1] Mark F Peterson & James G Hunt, International Perspectives on International Leadership, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 8/3, p203, 29p (1997) [2] Jay A. Conger, Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insiders perspective on these developing streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10/2, p145, 25p (1999) [3] James MacGregor Burns is a Pulitzer Prize-winning Presidential biographer and writer on transformational leadership; his recent books are (with Susan Dunn) The Three Roosevelts: Patrician Leaders Who Transformed America (Grove Atlantic, 2001) and (with Georgia Sorenson), Dead Center: Clinton-Gore Leadership and the Perils of Moderation (Scribner, 1999). [4] Kevin B. Lowe & K. Galen Kroeck, Effectiveness Correlates Of Transformational And Transactional Leadership: A Meta-Analytic Review Of The MLQ Literature, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7/3, p385, 41p (1996) [5] Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Management and Director of the Center for Leadership Studies in the School of Management at the State University of New York at Binghamton. He is the founding editor of Leadership Quarterl. [6] in Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, New York: The Free Press (1985), quoted by Lowe & Galen Kroeck (1996). [7] See the article by Bernard M. Bass & Bruce J. Avolio [8] Dong I. Junga, Chee Chow & Anne Wu, The role of transformational leadership in enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol 14/ 4-5, p. 525-544 (2003); this article has extensive references - not cited here - to original papers by Bass, Avolio, Lowe, Shamir and others. [9] Kimberly S Jaussi and Shelly D Dionne, Leading for creativity: The role of unconventional leader behavior, The Leadership Quarterly 14/4-5, p 475-498 (2003). [10] Bernard M. Bass & Paul Steidlmeier, Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10/2, p181, 37p (1999); see also the James McGregor Burns Academy of Leadership website for an essay by Bass on this topic. [11] Bass & Steidlmeier loc cit. [12] according to a large-scale survey by P.M. Podsakoff et al, Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, Vol 1, 107-142 (1990) quoted by Conger (1999).

[13] Bass & Steidlmeier loc cit. [14 a study by N.C. Roberts & R.T. Bradley, reported in Limits of charisma, p 253-275in J. A. Conger & R. N. Kanungo (Eds.), Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness(San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1988) quoted by Gary Yukl & Jane M. Howell, organizational And Contextual Influences On The Emergence And Effectiveness Of Charismatic Leadership, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10/2, p257, 27p (1999) [15] David A Waldman & Francis J Yammarino, CEO charismatic leadership: Levels-ofmanagement and levels-of-analysis effects, Academy of Management Review vol. 24/2, p 266285 (1999) [16] House, W.D. Spangler & J. Woycke, Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leadership effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, p. 364396 (1991). [17] Geert Hofstede, Cultures and organizations: software of the mind (London: McGraw-Hill, 1991) [18] Deanne N. Den Hartog et al, Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed?, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10/2, p219, 38p (1999) [19] A. Etzioni, A comparative analysis of complex organizations, New York: Free Press (1961), quoted by Den Hartog et al [20] Mark G Ehrhart & Katherine J. Klein, Predicting followers preferences for charismatic leadership: the influence of follower values and personality, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12/2, p153, 27p (2001) Copyright Desmond Griffin, 2003 Email: dgnetmail@optusnet.com.au Phone: +61 2 9401 9861 Fax: +61 2 9401 9861 Mobile: 0404 025 172

Use of the SCAI-S-G Users must obtain copyright authorization through a site license from the Alliance for the Study of School Climate (ASSC formerly WASSC). For those authorized users the following guidelines are provided as a basic protocol for the evaluation process. Each school's needs will vary. For those using the SCAI as part of a school-wide improvement effort, consulting the ASSC document "Change from the Inside: Examining K-12 School Reform Using the ASSC SCAI" may be helpful. Directions: Rate each item below. For each item there are 3 descriptions. Select the rating that best describes the current state at your school as a whole - Level 3(high), 2 (middle) or 1 (low). If you feel that the practices at your school rates between two of the descriptions provided then select the middle level option. Each item should receive only 1 rating/mark.

1. Physical Appearance
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle middle-low

Level - 1 (low)
low

1. a

Welcoming to outsiders, the school projects its identity to visitors.

Some signage for visitors as they enter the building, but images compete for attention.

Little concern for the image of the school.

1. b
Purposeful use of school colors/symbols

Some use of school colors/symbols but mostly associated with sports.

Students associate school colors with "losers."

1. c

Staff and students take ownership of physical appearance.

Staff regularly comments on school appearance, "That is the janitor's job" but students do not feel any sense of personal ownership.

1. d
No litter

Litter cleaned at the end of day

People have given up the battle over litter

1. e

Current student work is displayed to Few and/or only top performances are displayed Decades old trophies and athletic show pride and ownership by records in dusty cases students.

1. f

Things work and/or get fixed immediately

Things get fixed when someone complains enough

Many essential fixtures, appliances and structural items remain broken.

1. g

Staff and students have respect for custodians.

Most staff are cordial with custodians.

Custodians are demeaned

1. h

Graffiti is rare because students feel Graffiti occurs occasionally, but is dealt with by some sense of ownership of the the staff. school.

Graffiti occurs frequently and projects the hostility of students toward their school.

^ back to top

2. Faculty Relations
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle middle-low

Level - 1 (low)
low

2. a

Faculty members commonly collaborate on matters of teaching.

Most faculty members are congenial to oneTypically faculty members view one another, and occasionally collaborate. another competitively.

2. b

Faculty members approach problems as Faculty members attend to problems as a team/collective. related to their own interests.

Faculty members expect someone else to solve problems.

2. c

Faculty members use their planning time constructively and refrain from denigrating students in teacher areas.

Faculty members use time efficiently but feel the need to consistently vent displaced aggression toward students.

Faculty members look forward to time away from students so they can share their "real feelings" about them.

2. d

Faculty members are typically constructive when speaking of each other and/or administrators.

Faculty members wait for safe opportunities to share complaints about other teachers and/or administrators.

Faculty members commonly use unflattering names for other faculty and/or administration in private.

2. e

Faculty members feels a collective sense Faculty members give sincere "lip service" Faculty members are content with the of dissatisfaction with status quo, and to the idea of making things better. status quo and often resentful toward find ways to take action to improve. change-minded staff.

2. f

Faculty members exhibit high level of respect for one another.

Faculty members exhibit respect for a few Faculty members exhibit little respect of their prominent members. for self or others.

2. g

Faculty meetings are attended by most all, and address relevant content.

Faculty meetings are an obligation that most attend, but are usually seen as a formality.

Faculty meetings are seen as a waste of time and avoided when possible.

2. h

Staff and all-school events are well attended by faculty.

There are few regular attendees at school Faculty and staff do a minimum of events. investing in school-related matters.

2. i

Leadership roles are most likely performed by faculty members with other faculty expressing appreciation.

Leadership roles are accepted grudgingly Leadership is avoided, and those who by faculty, and other faculty members are do take leadership roles are seen as often suspicious of motives. traitors.

2. j

Teacher leadership is systematic and well-coordinated.

Teacher leadership develops in response toTeacher leadership exists informally or particular situations. not at all.

2. k

Faculty members have the time and

Faculty members congregate in small

Faculty members typically see no need

interest to commune with one another, and feel very little isolation.

cordial groups, yet commonly feel a sense to relate outside the walls of their class. that teaching is an isolating profession.

^ back to top

3. Student Interactions
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle

Level - 1 (low)
middle-low low

3. a

Students feel a sense of community and "school" is defined by the warm regard for the inhabitants of the building.

Students feel like they have friends and are safe, but the school is just a place to take classes.

Students feel no sense of affiliation with the school or community.

3. b

Various cultures and sub-groups blend, interrelate and feel like valid members of the community.

Various sub-groups avoid each other Various sub-groups are hostile to one and have varying degrees of sense of another. validity.

3. c

Students readily accept the purpose of zero Students think put downs are just part Put downs lead to violence. tolerance for "put downs." of their language.

3. d

Many students attend school events.

A few regulars attend school events.

It is un-cool to attend school events.

3. e

"Popular" students feel a an obligation to serve the school, not a sense of entitlement

"Popular" students treat the other popular students well.

"Popular" students use their political capital to oppress those less popular.

3. f

Most students feel safe from violence.

Most students don't expect much Most students do not feel safe from severe violence but accept minor acts violent acts, large or small. of harassment almost daily.

3. g

Leaders are easy to find due to the wide range of gifts that are validated and harnessed.

Leaders come from a small clique of students.

Students avoid leadership for fear of being labeled as "goody goodies".

3. h

Athletes are valued as quality community members and approach their role with a humble sense of honor.

It is assumed that some athletes are just "jerks" and jocks are not "real students".

Athletes band together to oppress the weaker and more academically gifted element in the school.

3. i

Most students expect to be given ownership over decisions that effect them.

Most students are upset when rights Most students assume that they have no are withdrawn, but typically take little rights. action.

3. j

Most students expect to engage in "authentic learning" activities and to be

Most students adjust their expectations to each teacher and

Most students' expectation of school is that little of value is learned in there and

taught with methods that make them responsible for their own learning.

focus mainly on doing what it takes to real world learning happens somewhere get "the grade." else.

^ back to top

4. Leadership/Decisions
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle middle-low

Level - 1 (low)
low

4. a

School has a sense of vision, and a mission that is shared by all staff.

School has a set of policies, a written mission, but no cohesive vision.

School has policies that are used inconsistently.

4. b

O
Vision is absent.

Vision comes from the collective will of the school community.

Vision comes from leadership.

4. c

School's decisions are conspicuously grounded in the mission.

Policies and mission exist but are not meaningful toward staff action

Mission may exist but is essentially ignored.

4. d

Vast majority of staff members feel valued and listened to.

Selected staff members feel occasionally recognized.

Administration is seen as playing favorites.

4. e

A sense of "shared values" is purposefully cultivated.

Most share a common value to do what's best for their students.

Guiding school values are in constant conflict.

4. f

Staff understands and uses a clear system for There is a SDM committee but most selecting priority needs, and has a highly real power is in a "loop" of functioning team for "shared decisioninsiders/decision makers. making".

Decisions are made autocratically or accidentally.

4. g

Most of the staff has a high level of trust and respect in leadership.

Some staff have respect for leadership. Most staff feel at odds with the leadership.

4. h

Teacher leadership is systematic and integral to the school's leadership strategy.

Some teachers take leadership roles Leadership is seen as solely the when they feel a great enough sense ofdomain of the administration. responsibility.

4. i

Leadership demonstrates a high level of accountability, and finds ways to "make it happen."

Leadership is highly political about how Leadership seems disconnected to resources are allocated and often outcomes and find countless reasons deflects responsibility. why "it can't happen."

4. j

Leadership is in tune with students and community.

Leadership has selected sources of info Leadership is isolated from the about the community and students. students and community.

4. k

Leadership is in tune with others' experience of the quality of school climate.

Leadership makes pro forma Leadership does not see school statements about wanting good school climate as a necessary interest. climate.

^ back to top

5. Discipline Environment
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle

Level - 1 (low)
middle-low low

5. a
School-wide discipline policy is consistently applied.

School-wide discipline policy is used by some staff.

School-wide discipline policy exists in writing only.

5. b

It is evident from student behavior that there are clear expectations and consistency in the discipline policy.

In many classes there are clear expectations and most teachers are fair and unbiased.

Students have to determine what each teacher expects and behavioral interventions are defined by a high level of subjectivity.

5. c

Most teachers use effective discipline strategies that are defined by logical consequences and refrain from punishments or shaming.

Most teachers use some form of positive or assertive discipline but accept the notion that punishment and shaming are necessary with some students.

Most teachers accept the notion that the only thing the students in the school understand is punishment and/or personal challenges.

5. d

Classrooms are positive places, and teachers maintain a positive affect, and follow-through with consequences in a calm and non-personal manner.

Most teachers maintain a positive climate, Classrooms are places where teachers but some days they just feel the need to get easily angered by students and complain about the class and/or get fed there is a sense of antagonism between up with the "bad kids" the class and the teacher

5. e

Maximum use of student-generated ideas and input.

Occasional use of student-generated ideas.

Teachers make the rules and student should follow them.

5. f

Most consider teaching and discipline within the lens of basic student needs that must be met for a functional class.

Most have some sensitivity to student Most view all student misconduct as needs, but the primary goal of classroom disobedience and/or the student's fault. management is control.

5. g

Teacher-student interactions could be typically described as supportive and respectful.

Teacher-student interactions could be typically described as fair but teacherdominated.

Teacher-student interactions are mostly teacher-dominated and reactive.

5. h

When disciplining students teachers typically focus on the problematic behavior not the student as a person.

When disciplining students teachers are When disciplining students teachers are typically assertive yet often reactive, and typically personal and often giving an overall inconsistent message. antagonistic.

5. i

Management strategies consistently Management strategies promote promote increased student self-direction acceptable levels of classroom control over time. over time, but are mostly teacher-

Management strategies result in mixed results: some classes seem to improve over time, while others seem to decline.

centered.

5. j

Teachers successfully create a sense of community in their classes

Teachers successfully create a working society in their classes

Teachers create a competitive environment

^ back to top

6. Learning/Assessment
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle

Level - 1 (low)
middle-low low

6. a

Assessment targets are clear and attainable for learners.

Most high achieving students can find a Students see grades as relating to way to meet the teacher's target. personal or accidental purposes.

6. b

Instruction/Assessment promotes student locus of control, sense of belonging and sense of competence.

Instruction/Assessment is most often Instruction/Assessment is focused on bits focused on relevant learning, yet mostly of knowledge that can be explained and rewards the high-achievers. then tested.

6. c

Student-controlled behavior (effort, listening, attitude, etc) is rewarded and even assessed when possible.

Student controlled behavior is verbally rewarded.

Only quantifiable academic and athletic outcomes are rewarded.

6. d

Teachers have some mode of making sense of, and being responsive to, varying learning styles.

Teachers are aware of learning styles as Teachers expect all students to conform a concept, and make some attempt in to their teaching style. that area.

6. e

Instruction is dynamic, involving, learner-centered, and challenging.

Instruction is mostly based on relevant Instruction is mostly "sit and get" concepts but often appears to be busywork

6. f

Students learn to work cooperatively and as members of teams.

Some teachers buy into the idea of cooperative learning.

Cooperative learning is seen as leading to chaos and cheating.

6. g

Students are given systematic opportunities to reflect on their learning progress.

Mostly higher-level students are given occasional opportunities to reflect on their learning in some classes.

Teaching is seen as providing maximum input and little opportunity for reflection exists.

6. h

Students are seen as the primary users of assessment information, and assessment is used for the purpose of informing the learning process and is never used to punish or shame.

Assessment is seen as something that occurs at the end of assignments. Grades are used primarily for studentto-student comparison.

Assessment is used to compare students to one another and/or to send a message to lazy students.

6. i

Classroom dialogue is characterized by

Classroom dialogue is active and

Classroom dialogue is infrequent and/or

higher-order thinking (e.g., analysis, application, and synthesis).

engaging but mostly related to obtaining involves a small proportion of students. right answers.

6. j

Students consistently feel as though they are learning subjects in-depth.

Students are engaged in quality content, Students feel the content is only but the focus is mostly on content occasionally meaningful and rarely coverage. covered in-depth.

6. k

Teachers promote the view that intelligence and ability are a function of each students' effort and application, and are not fixed. The major emphasis is placed on the process over the product.

Teachers promote the view that effort has a lot to do with how much students are able to accomplish. The major emphasis is placed on working to produce good products.

Teachers promote the view that intelligence and ability are fixed/innate traits and not all students have what it takes. The major emphasis is on the comparison of products/grades.

6. l

School-wide rewards often focus on student effort and contribution and sparingly on being the top performer.

School-wide rewards honor a variety of A competitive climate exists for the top performance-based achievements. scarce supply of school-wide rewards given only for performance.

^ back to top

7. Attitude and Culture

Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle middle-low

Level - 1 (low)
low

7. a

Students feel as though they are part of a community.

Students feel as though they are part of a society.

Students feel as though they are visitors in a building.

7. b

Students self-correct peers who use destructive and/or abusive language.

Students seek adult assistance to stop blatant verbal abuse.

Students accept verbal abuse as a normal part of their day.

7. c

Students feel as though they are working toward collective goals.

Students feel as though they are working toward independent goals.

Students feel as though they are competing with other students for scarce resources.

7. d

Students speak about the school in proud, positive terms.

Students speak of the school in neutral or mixed terms.

Students denigrate the school when they refer to it.

7. e

Most students feel listened to, represented, and that they have a voice.

Most students see some evidence that some Most students feel they have very little students have a voice. voice when at school.

7. f

Most students feel a sense of belonging Most students see some evidence that efforts Most students feel alone, alienated to something larger. are made to promote school spirit. and/or part of a hostile environment.

7. g

Teachers share commonly high

Most teachers have high expectations for

Often teachers openly express doubts

expectations for all students.

students who show promise.

about the ability of some students.

7. h

Students feel as though they owe their Graduates feel that they had an acceptable school a dept of gratitude upon school experience. graduation.

A high number of students graduate feeling cheated.

7. i

Students feel welcome and comfortable Some students have a few staff that they in talking to adults and/or designated target for advice. peer counselors.

Students assume adults do not have any interest in their problems.

7. j

School maintains traditions that promote school pride and a sense of historical continuity.

School maintains traditions that some students are aware of but most see as irrelevant to their experience.

School has given up on maintaining traditions due to apathy.

^ back to top

8. Community Relations
Level - 3 (high)
high high-middle

Level - 2 (middle)
middle middle-low

Level - 1 (low)
low

8. a

School is perceived as welcoming to all parents.

School is perceived as welcoming to certain parents.

School is suspicious of why parents would want to visit.

8. b

School sends out regular communication to community including invitations to attend key events.

School sends out pro forma School sends out pro forma communication that may be plentiful but communication only. is not created with the consumers' needs in mind.

8. c

Community members are regularly invited to speak in classes.

Inconvenience leads to few community members speaking in classes.

The vast majority of community members have not seen the inside of the school since they went there.

8. d

Service learning efforts are regular, promoting student learning and positive community-relations.

Service learning is performed, but very infrequently due to perceived inconvenience.

Service learning is seen as just a glorified field trip and therefore not worth the time or expense.

8. e

Parents and coaches all work for the best Parents support the coaches and teams if Parents feel free to challenge coaches, interest of student-athletes. things are going well. coaches mistrust parents.

8. f

Volunteer efforts are well coordinated, volunteers are plentiful, and conspicuously appreciated.

Volunteers are willing, but are often Volunteers are hard to find or unaware of the events and/or feel a lack unreliable. of guidance.

8. g
Athletic events and Fine Arts

Athletic events and Arts performances

Games and performances are poorly

performances are well attended due to deliberate efforts toward promotion and crowd appreciation.

are attended by a die-hard following and/or only when things are going well.

attended and as a result progressively less effort is made by participants.

The ASSC Climate Survery is Copyrighted 2004. Permission from ASSC to reproduce this survey is required.
2011 Alliance for the Study of School Climate, Charter College of Education,