Principals and teamwork among teachers: An exploratory study

Abstract

This study explored the role public school principals play in implementing teamwork among K-12 teachers. A sample of 636 U.S. principals completed an online survey rating the importance of teamwork, identifying the barriers teachers face when working in teams, and listing the initiatives they have taken to promote teamwork among teachers. The findings suggest that principals consider teamwork to be very important. They also showed that time constraints, relationship concerns, and differences in teaching and experience are the leading barriers to teamwork. The findings also indicated that principals take initiatives-such as modifying schedules, team-building activities, and professional development-to foster teamwork among teachers.

Full text

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
12
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
PRINCIPALS AND TEAMWORK AMONG TEACHERS:
AN EXPLORATORY STUDY
DIRETORES DE ESCOLA E O TRABALHO EM EQUIPE ENTRE
PROFESSORES: UM ESTUDO EXPLORATÓRIO
PRINCIPALES Y EL TRABAJO EN EQUIPO ENTRE MAESTROS:
UN ESTUDIO EXPLORATORIO
Meaghan Polega1
mpolega1@davenport.edu
Roque do Carmo Amorim Neto2
roque.neto@davenport.edu
Rebecca Brilowski3
rbrilowski@davenport.edu
Kristin Baker4
kbaker45@email.davenport.edu
ABSTRACT
This study explored the role public school principals play in implementing teamwork
among K-12 teachers. A sample of 636 U.S. principals completed an online survey
rating the importance of teamwork, identifying the barriers teachers face when
working in teams, and listing the initiatives they have taken to promote teamwork
among teachers. The ndings suggest that principals consider teamwork to be
very important. They also showed that time constraints, relationship concerns, and
dierences in teaching and experience are the leading barriers to teamwork. The
ndings also indicated that principals take initiatives—such as modifying schedules,
team-building activities, and professional development—to foster teamwork among
teachers.
KEY WORDS: PRINCIPALS; SCHOOL LEADERSHIP; TEAMWORK; TEACHERS’
TEAMWORK.
RESUMO
Este estudo explorou o papel que os diretores das escolas públicas desempenham
na implementação do trabalho em equipe entre professores do ensino fundamental
e médio. Uma amostra de 636 diretores dos EUA completaram uma pesquisa on-line
1 Davenport University
2 Davenport University
3 Davenport University
4 Davenport University

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
13
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
sobre a importância do trabalho em equipe, identicando as barreiras enfrentadas
pelos professores ao trabalharem em equipes e listando as iniciativas tomadas para
promover o trabalho em equipe entre os professores. As descobertas sugerem que
os diretores consideram o trabalho em equipe muito importante. Também mostraram
que restrições de tempo, preocupações com relacionamento e diferenças no ensino
e experiência são os principais obstáculos ao trabalho em equipe. Os resultados
também indicaram que os diretores tomam iniciativas tais como a modicação de
horários, atividades de formação de equipes e desenvolvimento prossional para
promover o trabalho em equipe entre os professores.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE: DIRETORES; LIDERANÇA ESCOLAR; TRABALHO EM
EQUIPE; TRABALHO EM EQUIPE DOS PROFESSORES.
RESUMEN
Este estudio exploró el papel que desempeñan los directores de las escuelas públicas
en la implementación del trabajo en equipo entre los maestros de K-12. Una muestra
de 636 directores de EE. UU. completó una encuesta en línea en la que se evaluó la
importancia del trabajo en equipo, identicando las barreras a las que se enfrentan
los maestros cuando trabajan en equipos y enumerando las iniciativas que han
tomado para promover el trabajo entre los maestros. Los hallazgos sugieren que los
directores consideran que el trabajo en equipo es muy importante. También mostraron
que las limitaciones de tiempo, las preocupaciones de relación y las diferencias en la
enseñanza y la experiencia son las principales barreras para el trabajo. Los hallazgos
también indicaron que los directores toman iniciativas, como la modicación de los
horarios, las actividades de creación de equipos y el desarrollo profesional, para
fomentar el trabajo en equipo entre los maestros.
PALABRAS CLAVE: PRINCIPALES; LIDERAZGO ESCOLAR; TRABAJO EN
EQUIPO; TRABAJO EN EQUIPO DE PROFESORES.
INTRODUCTION
Teamwork can be dened as the ability to work with others through cooperation
and communication to accomplish a common goal (Baker, Salas, King, Battles &
Barach, 2005; Ballangrund et al., 2017). For teamwork to be eective, members must
understand the team’s purpose, work toward that purpose, and be both independent of
and dependent on other members to accomplish the task (Baker et al., 2005). Strom,
Strom, and More (1999) also call attention to the critical role of communication for
teamwork success.
Teamwork can lead to a decrease in workplace errors, higher rates of satisfaction
among employees and clients, and provide opportunities for continuous improvement

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
14
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
among professionals (Ballangrund, 2017; Hwang & Ahn, 2015). Teamwork also brings
benets to schools. Dierent forms of teacher teamwork are associated with greater
impact on students, readiness to teach, teacher commitment, teacher entrepreneurial
behavior, and higher student achievement in math and reading (Ronfeldt, Farmer,
McQueen & Grissom, 2015; Shapira-Lischshinky & Aziel, 2010; Tschida, Smith &
Fogarty, 2015; van Dam, Schipper & Runhaar, 2010).
The benets of teamwork are being increasingly documented. Authors such
as O’Neill and Salas (2018) advocate for more empirical studies on teamwork in
general, while Amorim Neto, Bursey, Janowiak, Mccarty, and Demeter (2018) call for
an exploration of teachers’ teamwork from the perspective of school leaders. Their
call is relevant because school leaders—namely principals—are tasked with the
development of a culture of teamwork among teachers (Ketterlin-Geller, Baumer &
Lichon, 2014). In Benoliel and Schechter’s (2018, p.234) words, principals must “pull
teachers away from the comfort of their closed classroom doors and instructional
routines and allow them to take the risks of learning and doubting with colleagues”
to ensure school success. Accordingly, our exploratory study is an answer to their
call. Our study examines teamwork among teachers from the principals’ perspective—
identies the importance they give to teamwork, barriers teachers face when working
in teams, and initiatives taken by principals to further teamwork.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: TEAMWORK IN EDUCATION
Teamwork is viewed as fundamental to successful organizations, and more
specically to good teaching (Cherkowski & Schnellert, 2018; Leonard & Leonard, 2003,
2005). According to Leonard and Leonard (2003), professional teaching standards
have been revised to include language advocating for teachers’ learning communities
and collaboration. Teamwork not only deters teachers from working in isolation, it also
improves pedagogical practices and advances student acumen and achievement
(Achinstein, 2002; Datnow, 2011; Vangrieken, Dochy, Raes & Kyndt, 2015).
In a review of the literature, Vangrieken et al. (2015) provide a comprehensive
overview of teacher collaboration. The team found that schools must oer a climate
of trust, honesty, and respect to foster eective teamwork. An environment of open
communication and a shared sense of purpose and values also contribute to successful
teamwork (Kutsyuruba, 2011; Vangrieken et al., 2015). Furthermore, eective teams
are exible and regard the expertise of individual contributors. The work is not imposed
from the top down, but emerges from the eort of the entire group instead (Duyar,
Gumus & Bellibas, 2013; Vangrieken et al., 2015).

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
15
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
Teamwork has the potential to motivate teachers, reduce workload, and
increase self-ecacy (Vangrieken et al., 2015). According to Avanzi, Fraccaroli,
Castrelli, Marcionetti, Crescentini, Balducci, and van Dick (2017), social support is
a meaningful tool for navigating work overload. Supportive mentors, colleagues, or
team members share positive experiences and work together to complete tasks, thus
alleviating workload stress (Avanzi et al., 2017). Furthermore, research by Moolenaar,
Sleegers, and Daly (2011) found a relationship between the collective ecacy beliefs
of Dutch teacher teams and student success in language. When teamwork fosters
feelings of ecacy in teachers, it supports student achievement (Chantathai, Tesaputa
& Somprach, 2015; Moolenaar et al., 2011; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017; Vangrieken et
al., 2015).
Leonard and Leonard (2003) point out that teacher collaboration is unlikely
to develop in a toxic school culture. A hostile environment and other stressors in the
teaching profession—such as low salaries, lack of support from the administration,
and poor communication of expectations—have led to worldwide rising attrition rates
(Buchanan, Prescott, Schuck, Aubusson & Burke, 2013; Kutsyuruba, 2011; Skaalvik
& Skaalvik, 2017). Research in Norway suggests that teamwork has the potential to
subvert this trend (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017). The Norwegian team analyzed the
results of a questionnaire completed by over 500 teachers at ten randomly chosen
high schools. They concluded that social support may not necessarily alleviate stress.
But feelings of self-ecacy, job satisfaction, and enthusiasm can indeed be derived
through teacher teamwork, mentoring, and learning communities (Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2017). Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2017) also found that a supportive and collaborative
atmosphere at work could be associated with lower attrition rates. However, a recent
study with U.S. teachers found no correlation between teamwork and motivation to
leave teaching (Amorim Neto et al., 2018).
The processes of building eective teamwork and improving as a group can
be quite complex, often involving what Achinstein (2002) refers to as micropolitics.
Micropolitics is the use of power struggles within an organization as individuals or
groups set out to attain specic ambitions or objectives (Achinstein, 2002). Coups,
quibbles, and contention can create conict. But a failure to think pragmatically about
the delineation of tasks and the complicated nature of relationships—as well as a
miscommunication of goals—can lead to lack of trust and breakdown in the process
(Bennett & Gadlin, 2012; Datnow, 2011; Frederick, 2008; Zaccaro, Rittman & Marks,
2001).
While many teachers are uncomfortable with conict, it may actually have the
potential to be viewed as a source of renewal (Achinstein, 2002; Hargreaves, 1995).
Research challenges the commonly held notion that community is built in harmony

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
16
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
and consensus, asserting that conict can be an instrument of inquiry, growth, and
innovation (Achinstein, 2002). While it is true that strong communities typically have
common values or goals, Achinstein (2002) points out that teamwork, derived in a
climate in which cohesion itself is the value, can stie diverse ideas and minimize the
benets of reection. Achinstein (2002) explains that conict can be the catalyst for
transformation, allowing teachers to challenge the status quo and take greater risks to
reform education.
Asked what they needed to build eective teamwork, teachers oered
diverse opinions. These included additional training through appropriate professional
development, time and money for planning, more administrative support, and clear
expectations (Kutsyuruba, 2011; Leonard & Leonard, 2003; Matsuo, 2016). Teachers
consistently report frustration with inadequate resources and support, especially when
they perceive the work environment as unsupportive, discouraging, or even hostile
(Kutsyuruba, 2011; Leonard & Leonard, 2003; Matsuo, 2016).
These issues bring the role of principals in fostering teamwork to light. Mickan
and Rodger (2000) indicate clearly that eective teamwork stems—at least in part—from
supportive leadership. On the other hand, leadership actions presented by principals
can be a barrier to teamwork (Karakus & Tomeren, 2005). Because the support of
principals to teamwork does not happen automatically, their role in implementing
teamwork and a culture of collaboration in schools requires further exploration.
PRINCIPALS FOSTERING TEAMWORK
Facilitating a culture of teamwork among teachers is one of the many tasks
of principals (Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2014). In Turkey, Duyar et al. (2013) found that
principal leadership and teacher teamwork rank high among variables that aect job
satisfaction and self-ecacy. Schools in Turkey are adapting to support teamwork
among teachers. As a result, the role of principals is shifting from hierarchical, top-
down management to transformational leadership (Duyar et al., 2013).
Eective leadership emphasizes teamwork and collaboration rather than a
singular manager. Principals are responsible for the transformational shift that occurs
when schools commit to a culture of teamwork (van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008). Since
schools tend to be highly structured organizations, principals must modify their structure
to strengthen the culture of collaboration (Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014). According
to van der Mescht and Tyala (2008), successful principals support teamwork by
establishing a cohesive climate in which team members from distinctive backgrounds
with various areas of expertise collaborate to reach a shared goal. When principals
facilitate successful teams by focusing on a wide variety of skills, teachers become

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
17
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
part of teams with a comprehensive range of ideas, expertise, and experiences that
can be shared and reected upon (Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2014; Mullen & Hutinger,
2008; van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008).
Principals who are intentional about facilitating teamwork establish a precise
mission and provide opportunities for teams to develop a shared vision (Drago-
Severson & Pinto, 2006). By making the purpose and vision of teamwork well-dened,
they provide teachers with a sense of unity and alleviate isolation. The organizational
school structure gives way to an empowered culture of collaboration (Szczesiul &
Huizenga, 2014). What emerges from this new mindset is a cohesive community
of learners driven by diversity, participation, and shared responsibilities (Mullen &
Hutinger, 2008; van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008). As teamwork ourishes, the culture of
schools becomes less rigid and an environment of risk-taking, creativity, and openness
is unfurled (van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008).
Early work in Australia by Walker (1994) suggests that teachers entrusted
with decision-making and shared responsibilities become more willing to participate,
take creative risks, and contribute to the overall eectiveness of the school. Further
studies in Dutch elementary schools found that teachers empowered in this way foster
strong student achievement (Moolenaar, Sleegers & Daly, 2011). Likewise, a study
of secondary schools in Kenya found that school leaders can inspire ownership and
achievement when teachers are included in decision-making and planning (Zaveria &
Thuringi, 2017). This study also indicated that teachers more successfully implement
school programs and may also improve student performance when principals design
eective teams.
As decision-making and shared responsibilities are ltered through teams,
principals become wellsprings of resources and support (Walker, 1994). They can
support teacher teams by building mutual planning time into team schedules, giving
feedback to teams as they work toward team goals, and advocating for a shared vision
(Mullen & Hutinger, 2008). In addition, principals can model meaningful professional
learning by leading teams in study groups (DuFour, 2006). They can also act as a
buer for teams against external factors—such as bureaucracy and policy—and allow
teachers to stay focused on the team’s creative work (van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008).
In a study in South Africa, van der Mescht and Tyala (2008) explored the
perceptions of principals regarding team management. They found that teachers
consider time, trust, and diversity as necessary components of good teams. For
collaboration in schools to ourish, leaders must foster a climate of trust (Duyar et al.,
2013). Principals who cultivate teamwork will establish a culture of trust and openness,
in which teachers feel a sense of shared values and purpose, feel safe to express
their feelings, enjoy acknowledgement for their accomplishments, and know they are

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
18
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
buered against negative external forces (Duyar et al., 2013; van der Mescht & Tyala,
2008; Walker, 1994).
Van der Mescht and Tyala (2008) also support a transformation from the
hierarchical management approach to distributed leadership—an approach in which
members of the team evolve and contribute to the team in varying ways. Szczesiul and
Huizenga (2014) point out that the hierarchical use of mandated, formal controls has
been proven ineectual in complex school settings. In fact, a climate of authoritarian
oversight, rather than organically derived collaborative processing, may put teamwork
at risk (Mullen & Hutinger, 2008; Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014; van der Mescht & Tyala,
2008; Walker, 1994). When the Turkish Ministry of National Education implemented
a training program on collaboration without teachers’ input, they were less willing to
embrace it (Duyar et al., 2013). The authors of the Turkish study emphatically call on
the centralized systems integral to the country to rethink education.
Nonetheless, barriers like the ones in Turkey exist elsewhere. In Australia,
Walker (1994) expressed concerns about overburdened teachers. He noted that
pushing teachers to take on extra duties without extra pay could undermine teamwork.
A similar U.S. study stated that teachers develop resentment toward the process when
they participate in teamwork without feeling like they have inuence (Tschannen-Moran,
2001). This is a term known as contrived collaboration. Tschannen-Moran (2001) also
referred to principals’ lack of trust. They feared that teachers were not trained to lead
or that they might not perform competent work in shared leadership positions.
Another barrier noted by several studies was the scarcity of time (Amorim
Neto et al., 2018; Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2014; Mullen & Hutinger, 2008). In some
cases, principals are concerned about the challenge of nding common time for
all team members to meet (Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014; Zaveria & Thinguri, 2017).
Other studies note the challenge of team members who misuse time or fail to use it
productively (Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2014; Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014). In this sense,
van der Mescht and Tyala (2008) alert us to teachers who undermine the process of
collaboration—what the authors call sabotage. Such teachers may not contribute as
much to the process, or they may act as disruptive elements.
Research has found that lack of clear communication is a sizable barrier when
principals set out to build teacher teams (Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014; Tschannen-
Moran, 2001; Walker, 1994). Szczesiul and Huizenga (2014) argued that lack of
communication includes the principal’s inability to convey the vision or provide
feedback. They noted that this can leave teachers feeling uncertain. They also found
that teams end up longing for clearly stated goals to give them a sense of purpose.
These ndings resonate with the study Amorim Neto et al. (2018) conducted with
322 U.S. public school teachers. Their study found that providing a clear vision and

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
19
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
goals is the number-one action teachers expect principals to take to foster teamwork.
Furthermore, teachers do not want a vision and goals imposed on them. They expect
principals to engage them in developing the school’s vision and goals, while leading by
example (Amorim Neto et al., 2018). Additionally, teachers would like to see principals
foster teamwork in ways that include trusting teachers and listening to their feedback,
running team-building activities, providing time for collaborative work, and oering
professional development focused on teamwork (Amorim Neto et al., 2018).
Fostering teamwork involves much more than simply addressing specic
barriers. Principals need to engage in a deeper transformation of the school culture.
For example, Szczesiul and Huizenga (2014) reveal that team members end up
feeling like the process does not really matter when principals fail to oer appropriate
oversight or make decisions without consulting them. Furthermore, principals must be
aware of tensions that may arise when the culture transforms from power to creative
collaboration (van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008). As they face external administrative
pressure, principals must nd a balance between compliance and collaboration to
emerge as the buer between policy and practice (van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008).
Shifting the culture of education is a daunting task, requiring more than
managerial skills (van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008). It requires a shared vision, the
courage to take risks, and a clearly dened set of values (Drago-Severson & Pinto,
2006; van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008). Furthermore, it requires educational leaders to
reinvent schools with wisdom and teamwork (Tschannen-Moran, 2001).
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE FIELD
This exploratory study addresses the following research questions:
(i) To what extent do principals nd teamwork as important?
(ii) What are the most common barriers they face?
(iii) How do principals foster teamwork among teachers?
By tackling these questions, this study attempts to ll a gap in the literature
surrounding teamwork in the educational eld by assessing the importance that
principals place on it, identifying from the principals’ perspective the most common
barriers that teachers face when engaging teamwork, and compiling a list of the most
common initiatives principals take to foster teamwork. This study is relevant because
the research on teamwork in the teaching profession is still very limited. Much of
the work focuses on the positive outcomes of teamwork in teaching and the barriers
teachers experience when working with a team (e.g., Achinstein, 2002; Amorim Neto
et al., 2018; Hallam, Smith, Hite, Hite & Wilcox, 2015; Kutsyuruba, 2011; Vangrieken

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
20
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
et al., 2015). Given the importance of leaders in shaping the culture of organizations
(Groysberg, Lee, Price & Cheng, 2018; Warrick, 2017), more specically the role
of principals in providing teachers with support systems and impacting teachers’
schedules and workload (Hallam et al., 2015; Hallam, Boren, Hite, Hite & Mugimu,
2013; Thomas, 2014; Yirci, zdemir, Kartal & Kocabaş, 2014), it is important to
explore how they value teamwork and foster teamwork among teachers—thereby
oering more evidence to the literature in this area.
METHODS: PROCEDURES AND PARTICIPANTS
U.S. K-12 public school principals received an online message. It informed
them of the goal of the study and of their right to decline participating or discontinue
their participation at any time. They were also ensured that their identity would remain
anonymous. After completing the survey, they could enter a drawing for one of two
$30 gift cards. A total of 636 principals completed the survey.
The mean age of responders was 49.3 (SD = 8.2) and mean years experience
as principal was 8.6 (SD = 6.6). Females comprised 57.39% of participants. This gender
distribution is similar to the overall U.S. public school principal population. According
to the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2017)
in 2015-16, 54.2% of principals identify as female. Most participants had a Master’s
degree (n = 543, 85.37%). More than half were principals at elementary schools (n =
349, 54.87%), consistent with national statistics.
MEASURES: DEMOGRAPHICS
Participants were asked to provide information regarding age, gender,
experience as principal, school type, and highest degree achieved.
IMPORTANCE OF TEAMWORK
Principals were asked to rate the overall importance of teamwork on a ve-
point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (very important). Then they
were asked to justify their response to this item.

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
21
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS
Principals were asked to identify up to three barriers they perceive teachers
may face when working in a team. We also asked them to identify up to three initiatives
they have taken to foster teamwork.
ANALYSES
We performed descriptive statistical analyses to determine the age, gender,
years of experience, school type, and highest degree. We also analyzed the importance
of teamwork with descriptive statistics.
We performed an analysis of frequency to identify the barriers principals
perceive teachers having to teamwork and the initiatives they have taken to promote
teamwork. Finally, we performed an analysis of frequency to determine why principals
felt teamwork was important.
RESULTS: THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHERS’ TEAMWORK
To assess the extent to which principals nd teachers’ teamwork important,
participants rated it in a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (very
important). Almost all rated it as highly important (M = 4.803, SD = 0.425). Only 7
(1.1%) principals attributed low importance to teachers’ teamwork.
As a follow-up question, we asked principals to briey justify their response
regarding the importance of teamwork. Their reasons focused on three elements:
school culture and success, student achievement, and teachers’ pedagogical practices
and personal growth. While these elements are usually intertwined in the daily school
routine, we present them separately below to better illustrate the participants’ reasoning.
i) School culture and success (n = 185, 35.99%). Teachers’ teamwork is
important to principals because it benets the entire school by facilitating community
building, school success, and the creation and achievement of common goals
throughout the building. According to principals, teamwork helps create a positive
school culture, an environment of open communication, and a climate of trust, honesty,
and respect. Additionally, teamwork supports all individuals in the building—teachers,
sta members, and students. “We have to work together to best serve kids AND
ourselves. It allows us to build a learning community to support the growth of everyone
in our building,” said one principal.
ii) Student achievement (n = 128, 24.90%). Principals believe that teamwork
among teachers positively impacts student achievement and creates a model which

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
22
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
students observe and engage in good teamwork. Teamwork can create an environment
in which students are successful and achieve more, both socially and academically.
“Collaboration is extremely important in achieving schoolwide goals and vision. These
goals are student-centered and ultimately contribute to student achievement,” said a
principal.
iii) Teachers’ practices and growth (n = 201, 39.11%). Principals stated that
teamwork impacts teaching practices and inuences teacher personal growth. Many
principals reported that teamwork helps teachers by giving them role models, other
teachers to talk to about best practices, and the opportunity to examine dierent
perspectives and opinions. “When teachers work as a team they learn and grow
together as they see things from others’ points of view. An eective team taps the
expertise of each person, honors the opinions of all and compels each member to be
curious, inquisitive and resourceful professional learners and problem solvers,” said
one principal.
BARRIERS TO TEAMWORK AMONG TEACHERS
Participants were asked to list up to three barriers that teachers face regarding
teamwork. The list presented in Table 1 indicates that time constraints, relationship
issues, and teaching concerns were the main barriers teachers face when engaging
in teamwork.
Table 1: Barriers to teachers’ teamwork according to principals
Barriers n (%)
Time constraints 408 (26.19%)
Relationship issues (lack of trust, conict, communication issues) 252 (16 .17%)
Teaching concerns (lack of resources, dierences in teaching
style, experience, and knowledge)
252 (16 .17%)
Personality dierences (attitude, ego, personal values) 218 (13.99%)
Other barriers (isolation, leadership issues, lack of buy-in) 174 (11.17%)
Unclear roles and goals 131 (8.41%)
Unwillingness to participate in teams or to change 65 (4.17%)
Insecurities 58 (3.72%)
Total: 1558 (100%)

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
23
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
PRINCIPALS’ INITIATIVES TO FOSTER TEAMWORK
Participants were asked to identify up to three initiatives they have taken
to encourage teamwork among teachers. The list indicates that the most frequent
initiatives taken was modifying schedules, followed by team-building activities and
professional development. Table 2 contains the complete list of initiatives.
Table 2: Initiatives taken to promote teamwork
Initiatives n (%)
Modifying schedules (common planning time, adding time to meet) 324 (21.04%)
Team-building activities (relationship building, awards, celebrations) 205 (13.31%)
Professional development/training (book studies, mentoring,
classroom observations)
219 (14.22%)
Professional Learning Communities (PLC) 165 (10.71%)
Regular meetings (grade-level meetings, team meetings) 164 (10.6 5%)
Other initiatives (district/state driven, less responsibilities for sta,
creating common goals/expectations)
463 (3 0.06%)
Total: 1540 (100%)
DISCUSSION
This exploratory study had three main objectives: (i) assessing the importance
of teachers’ teamwork according to principals; (ii) identifying the barriers teachers face
when working in teams; and (iii) listing the initiatives that principals take to promote
teamwork. The following sections address the ndings for each of these goals and
their implications for the eld. These are followed by the limitations in our study that
we identied and recommendations for future studies.
THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHERS’ TEAMWORK
The high importance of teachers’ teamwork reported by participants is
encouraging. The literature has long indicated the positive benets of teamwork (e.g.,
Datnow, 2011; Ronfeldt, Farmer, McQueen & Grissom, 2015; Shapira-Lischshinky &
Aziel, 2010; Tschida, Smith & Fogarty, 2015; van Dam, Schipper & Runhaar, 2010;
Vangrieken et al., 2015), which we highlighted in previous sections of this paper.
Similarly, the reasons provided by principals for such evaluation—which included
school culture and success, student achievement, and teachers’ pedagogical practices

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
24
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
and personal growth—are also aligned with the previously cited literature. The results
suggest that principals in our sample seem to be aware of teamwork as a strategy to
school success in a very dynamic society.
The fact that principals already have a high regard for teamwork suggests that
school districts can continue to reinforce this message and provide tools for principals
to identify obstacles to teamwork and address them. As Karakus and Toremen (2008)
suggest, teamwork eectiveness has not only to do with teachers’ relationships and
individual dierences, but also with structural issues and how leadership is exercised.
School districts and principals need to see themselves as part of the equation.
They impact teachers’ teamwork and it impacts them in return. Once schools have
redesigned themselves to embrace a culture of collaboration—which includes the
ability to doubt deeply held assumptions regarding education, leadership, and the very
role of schools—there is no way to go back to a hierarchical management approach,
as discussed by van der Mescht and Tyala (2008). In this sense, the very nature of
principalship changes. Principals are no longer managers or enforcers, instead they
become leaders who facilitate the development of a shared vision, foster a sense
of unity, and empower a culture of collaboration (Amorim Neto et al., 2018; Drago-
Severson & Pinto, 2006; Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014).
In light of this study’s ndings, current and prospective principals could be further
educated on team development strategies and theories, how a culture of collaboration
actuates the exercise of their profession, and the nature of the expectations that school
districts place on them. In this way, they can support teachers in designing successful
teamwork initiatives and redesigning school systems and practices that previously led
to isolation and competition.
BARRIERS TO TEAMWORK AMONG TEACHERS
The barriers to teamwork identied by principals include time constraints,
relationship concerns (e.g., lack of trust, conicts, communication issues), teaching
and personality dierences, willingness to participate, and more. These deterrents to
teamwork are aligned with the literature. For instance, Vangrieken et al. (2015) discusses
how conicts, unclear goals, poor communication, and little time can negatively impact
teamwork. Outside of the school context, Poghosyan, Norful, and Martsolf (2017)
highlight the role of time constraints and lack of participation on teamwork. Similarly,
Levitt (2016) indicates that personal dierences such as age, educational background,
and gender could be barriers to teamwork. Levitt’s conclusions are also supported by
previous work by Karakus and Toremen (2008).

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
25
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
While those barriers to teamwork are well-known to researchers and
practitioners, we were surprised by the ways in which principals downplayed the role
of leadership on teamwork. A small number of participants reported leadership issues.
The number was so small that we presented it under “Other barriers.” It is possible
that they did not see themselves or other principals as a potential barrier. As shown
in the results, they put a high importance on teamwork and took action to foster it.
However, it is possible that they are not fully aware of the critical role they play in
fostering or derailing teamwork in schools. According to Park, Henking, and Egley
(2005), leaders need to be intentional when promoting teamwork. In that way, they can
demonstrate reliability, trustworthiness, and embodying behaviors that demonstrate
the value of teamwork, rather than just talking about it. Deriving from Tschannen-
Moran (2001) and van der Mescht and Tyala (2008), it can be argued that teamwork is
less likely to take place if principals do not trust that teachers are capable of oering
meaningful contributions. This is relevant because previous studies have found that
some teachers do not believe principals trust them (Balyer, 2017; Yirci et al., 2014).
Teachers respond by not trusting principals in return (Hallam et al., 2015). In such an
environment, meaningful collaboration and a sense of community are compromised.
This can ultimately lead to teacher attrition (Boyd, Grossman, Ing, Lankford, Loeb &
Wycko, 2011; Yirci et al., 2014).
These ndings are a call to school principals to further develop their awareness
of their own power to block and/or support the growth of teamwork through specic
actions as well as forging a culture of collaboration. They also remind teachers that a
well-prepared and well-intentioned principal can only do so much if they sabotage the
collaborative processes introduced by school leadership. Professional development of
teachers and principals, as well as the certifying programs, could integrate teamwork
both as a content and a process aimed at supporting student success.
HOW PRINCIPALS FOSTER TEAMWORK
The initiatives principals take to promote teamwork among teachers include
modifying schedules to increase common time and availability for meetings, conducting
team-building activities, providing professional development and training in teamwork,
establishing PLCs, and conducting regular meetings by grade levels or discipline areas.
These actions seem appropriate to address the barriers discussed in the previous
section. In fact, just like time constraints was the main barrier identied by principals,
modifying schedules to allow for common time was their number-one initiative. This
is meaningful because the issue of time is commonly found in the literature (e.g.,
Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2014; Mullen & Hutinger, 2008; Zaveria & Thinguri, 2017) as a

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
26
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
deterrent to teamwork. Additionally, most of the initiatives reported are aligned with
actions that U.S. public school teachers expect principals to take to foster teamwork,
such as providing professional development, time for collaboration, and running team-
building activities. (Amorim Neto et al., 2018).
While principals seem to be aware of the concerns shared by researchers and
teachers in terms of barriers and actions taken, our ndings suggest that principals
may be losing sight of an important role of leaders: shaping organizational culture
(Groysberg et al., 2018; Warrick, 2017). U.S. public school teachers have said that
their main expectation is for principals to provide a clear vision and goals (Amorim
Neto et al., 2018). The lack of a clear vision and goals may lead to confusion due
to faulty communication (Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014) and to contrived collaboration
(Tschannen-Moran, 2001). It is therefore important to put all initiatives in the context
of a culture of collaboration that fosters participation and shared leadership (Mullen &
Hutinger, 2008; van der Mescht & Tyala, 2008; Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014).
These ndings regarding the initiatives that principals take to foster teamwork
suggest that while they are mostly in tune with their teachers’ expectations, they need
to continue working toward a more systemic perspective of their initiatives to develop a
deeper understanding of teamwork and forge a culture of collaboration in their schools
through a shared vision and goals (Drago-Severson & Pinto, 2006; Hallam et al., 2015).
A culture of teamwork and collaboration would lead to a school that Cetin and Keser
(2015) describe as a place where adults learn together and continuously with focus
on student success. A school culture that fosters teachers’ teamwork also requires
attention to their needs, expectations, and inclinations (Karakus & Tomeren, 2008).
While principals are expected to shape the culture of their schools, they need proper
education and the support of school districts to do so. In this regard, the ndings of
this study are also a call to certication programs and school districts to ensure that
principals are well-equipped and able to develop a common vision and goals with the
school community. Teachers expect principals to do more than manage schedules,
organize professional developments, and run meetings. Teachers want principals to
be visionaries who engage them in achieving a common goal and developing a shared
vision (Amorim Neto et al., 2018; Drago-Severson & Pinto, 2006).
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Up to now, only limited studies have explored teachers’ teamwork from the
principals’ perspective. This paper is a step toward a systematic investigation of the
importance of teamwork for principals, the perceived barriers, and the actions they
take to foster it in their schools. While the exploratory nature and the type of analysis

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
27
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
conducted were appropriate to address the research questions with a large sample of
principals, the ndings of our study were limited. We identied the actions principals
take to foster teamwork, but did not explore decision-making processes nor the level
of involvement of teachers in the implementation of these actions. Similarly, while we
placed the role of principals toward teachers’ teamwork in the larger context of school
culture and leadership, we did not ask any questions specically addressing principals’
perceived leadership styles and their impact on teamwork. Finally, while inquiring
about the actions taken by principals to foster teamwork, we did not ask them about
the success of those actions and potential takeaways.
We reinforce the calls by O’Neill and Salas (2018) for more empirical studies
on teamwork in organizations and by Amorim Neto et al. (2018) for a continuous
exploration of teachers’ teamwork from the perspective of school leaders. To expand
the literature on the topic at hand and address this study’s limitations, we recommend
in-depth qualitative studies aimed at uncovering the decision-making processes
that support the actions principals take to foster teamwork. More specically, future
research could assess the extent to which teachers and other sta are involved in
the decision-making and implementation of such actions. Future studies could also
explore the success rate of actions taken by principals to foster teamwork as well as
what they have learned from their successes and failures in such implementations.
Finally, the implementation of teamwork from the perspective of principals could also
be explored from the broader discussion of shared leadership, including how principals
understand their roles as leaders regarding developing a shared vision and common
goals that require teamwork.
REFERENCES
ACHINSTEIN, B. Conict amid community: The micropolitics of teacher collaboration.
Teachers College Record, 2002, 104(3), p.421-455.
AMORIM NETO, R. C., BURSEY, A., JANOWIAK, D., McCARTY, C., & DEMETER,
B. Teamwork and motivation to leave the teaching profession: An exploratory study.
Journal of Education, 2008, 198(3), p.215-224.
AVANZI, L., FRACCAROLI, F., CASTELLI, L., MARCIONETTI, J., CRESCENTINI, A.,
BALDUCCI, C., & VAN DICK, R. How to mobilize social support against workload and
burnout: The role of organizational identication. Teaching and Teacher Education,
2008, 69, p.154-167.

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
28
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
BAKER, D. P., SALAS, E., KING, H., BATTLES, J., & BARACH, P. (2005). The role of
teamwork in the professional education of physicians: Current status and assessment
recommendations. Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety,
31(4), p.185-202.
BALLANGRUD, R., HUSEBO, S. E., & HALL-LORD, M. L. Cross-cultural validation
and psychometric testing of the Norwegian version of the TeamSTEPPS® teamwork
perceptions questionnaire. BMC Health Services Research, 2017, 17(1), p. 799-809.
BALYER, A. Trust in school principals: Teachers’ opinions. Journal of Education and
Learning, 2017, 6(2), p. 317-325.
BENOLIEL, P., & SCHECHTER, C. Teamwork doubting and doubting teamwork.
Improving Schools, 2018, 21(3), p. 225-239.
BOYD, D., GROSSMAN, P., ING, M. LANKFORD, H., LOEB, S., & WYCKOFF, J.
(2011). The inuence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American
Educational Research Journal, 48, p. 303-333.
BUCHANAN, J., PRESCOTT, A., SCHUCK, S., AUBUSSON, P., BURKE, P., &
LOUVIERE, J. Teacher retention and attrition: Views of early career teachers.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 2013, 38(3), p. 112-129.
CETIN, M., & KESER, S. The teacher leader in context of shared leadership in public
schools. American Journal of Educational Research, 2015, 3(8), p.1027-1035.
CHANTATHAIi, P., TESAPUTA, K., & SOMPRACH, K. Development of eective teacher
program: Teamwork building program for Thailand’s municipal schools. International
Education Studies, 2015, 8(9), p.138-147.
CHERKOWSKI, S., & SCHNELLERT, L. Teacher, team, and school change through
reciprocal learning. Teacher Development, 2018, 22(2), p. 229-248.
DATNOW, A. Collaboration and contrived collegiality: Revisiting Hargreaves in the age
of accountability. Journal of Educational Change, 2011, 12(2), p. 147-158.
DRAGO-SEVERSON, E., & PINTO, K. School leadership for reducing teacher isolation:
Drawing from the well of human resources. International Journal of Leadership in
Education, 2006, 9(2), p. 129-155.
DUFOUR, R. Collaboration is the key to unlocking potential. The Learning Principal,
2006, 2(3), p. 6-7.

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
29
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
DUYAR, I., GUMUS, S., & BELLIBAS, M. S. Multilevel analysis of teacher work
attitudes. International Journal of Educational Management, 2013, 27( 7), p. 700-
719.
GROYSBERG, B., LEE, J., PRICE, J., & CHENG, J. (2018). The leader’s guide
to corporate culture. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://www.
spencerstuart.com/~/media /pdf%20les/research%20and%20insight%20pdfs/the-
leaders-guide-to-corporate-culture.pdf
HALLAM, P. R., BOREN, D. M., HITE, J. M., HITE, S. J., & MUGIMU, C. B. Headteacher
visibility and teacher perceptions of headteacher trustworthiness: A comparison of
the Ugandan context to existing theory. International Journal of Educational
Development, 2013, 233, p. 510-520.
HALLAM, P. R., SMITH, H., HITE, J., HITE, S., & WILCOX, B. Trust and collaboration
in PLC teams: Teacher relationships, principal support, and collaborative benets.
NASSP Bulletin, 2015, 99, p. 193-216.
HWANG, J. I., & AHN, J. Teamwork and clinical error reporting among nurses in
Korean hospitals. Asian Nursing Research, 2015, 9(1), p.14 -20.
KARAKUS, M., & TOREMEN, F. How our schools can be more synergic: Determining
the obstacles of teamwork. Team Performance Management, 2005, 14(1), p. 233-
247.
KETTERLIN-GELLER, L. R., BAUMER, P., & LICHON, K. Administrators as advocates
for teacher collaboration. Intervention in School and Clinic, 2014, 51(1), p. 51-57.
KUTSYURUBA, B. Teacher collaboration, mentorship, and intergenerational gap in
Post-Soviet Ukrainian schools. International Journal of Educational Reform, 2011,
20(3), p. 226-255.
LEONARD, L., & LEONARD, P. The continuing trouble with collaboration: Teachers
talk. Current Issues in Education, 2003, 15(3), p.1-10 .
LEONARD, L. J., & LEONARD, P. E. Achieving professional community in schools:
The administrator challenge. Planning and Changing, 2005, 36(1), p.23-49.
LEVITT, S. R. Addressing cross-cultural teamwork barriers: Implications for industry
practice and higher education curricula. Industry and Higher Education, 2016, 30(5),
p. 315-320.

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
30
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
MATSUO, M. Reective leadership and team learning: An exploratory study. Journal
of Workplace Learning, 2016, 28(5), p.307-321.
MICKAN, S., & RODGER, S. Characteristics of eective teams: a literature review.
Australian Health Review, 2000, 23(3), p. 201-208.
MOOLENAAR, N. M., SLEEGERS, P. J. C., & Daly, A. J. Teaming up: Linking
collaboration networks, collective ecacy, and student achievement. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 2011, 28(2), p. 251-262.
MULLEN, C. A., & HUTINGER, J. L. The principal’s role in fostering collaborative
learning communities through faculty study group development. Theory Into Practice,
2008, 47(4), p. 276-285.
O’NEILL, T. A., & SALAS, E. Creating high performance teamwork in organizations.
Human Resource Management Review, 2018, 28, p. 325-331.
PARK, S., HENKIN, A. S., & ENGLEY, R. Teacher team commitment, teamwork and
trust: Exploring associations. Journal of Educational Administration, 2005, 43(5),
p. 462-479.
POGHOSYA N, L., NORFUL, A. A., & MARTSOLF, G. R. Primary care nurse
ractitioner practice characteristics: Barriers and opportunities for interprofessional
teamwork. The Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 2017, 40(1), p. 77-86.
RONFELDT, M., FARMER, S., McQUEEN, K., & GRISSOM, J. Teacher collaboration
in instructional teams and student achievement. American Educational Research
Journal, 2015, 52, p. 475-514.
SHAPIRA-LISCHSHINSKY, O., & AZIEL, V. Team culture perceptions, commitment
and eectiveness: Teamwork eects. Educational Practice and Theory, 2010, 32,
p.33-56.
S K A ALV I K, E. M., & S K A A LVI K , S. Still motivated to teach? A study of school context
variables, stress and job satisfaction among teachers in senior high school. Social
Psychology of Education, 2017, 20(1), p. 15-37.
SZCZESIUL, S., & HUIZENGA, J. The burden of leadership: Exploring the principal’s
role in teacher collaboration. Improving Schools, 2014, 17(2), p. 176-191.
STROM, P. S., STROM, R. D., & MOORE, E. G. Peer and self-evaluation of teamwork
skills. Journal of Adolescence, 1999, 22, p. 539-553.

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
31
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
THOMAS, S. The eects of principal leadership behavior on new teachers’ overall
job satisfaction (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/
viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.860.9877&rep=rep1&type=pdf
TSCHANNEN-MORAN, M. Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of
Educational Administration, 2001, 39(4), p. 308-331.
TSCHIDA, C. M., SMITH, J. J., & FOGARTY, E. A. “It just works better”: Introducing
the 2:1 model of co-teaching in teacher preparation. The Rural Educator, 2015, 36,
p. 11-26.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of
Education Statistics, 2017. Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/
tables/dt17_212.08.asp
VAN DAM, K., SCHIPPER, M., & RUNHAAR, P. Developing a competency-based
framework for teacher’s entrepreneurial behaviour. Teaching and Teacher Education,
2010, 26, p. 965-971.
VAN DER MESCHT, H., & TYALA, Z. School principals’ perceptions of team
management: A multiple case-study of secondary schools. South African Journal of
Education, 2008, 28(2), p. 221-239.
VANGRIEKEN, K., DOCHY, F., RAES, E., & KYNDT, E. Teacher collaboration: A
systematic review. Educational Research Review, 2015, 15(1), p. 17-40.
WALKER, A. Teams in schools. International Journal of Educational Management,
1994, 8(4), p. 38-44.
WARRICK, D. D. What leaders need to know about organizational culture. Business
Horizons, 2017, 60, p. 395-404.
YIRCI, R., ÖZDEMIR, T., KARTAL, S., & KOCABA, . Teachers’ perceptions
regarding school principals’ coaching skills. School Leadership & Management,
2014, 34, p. 454-469.
Zaveria, K. W., & Thinguri, R. W. Critical analysis of the relationship between
principals’ management skills and team work in public secondary schools
in Kenya. European Journal of Education Studies, 2017, 3(1), p. 152-163.

POLEGA, M; AMORIM NETO, RC; BRILOWSKI, R; BAKER, K. Principals and
among teachers: an exploratory study. Revista @mbienteeducação. São Paulo:
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 12-32 mai/ago 2019.
32
e-ISSN 1982-8632
https://doi.org/10.26843/ae19828632v12n22019p12a32
SOBRE OS AUTORES
MEAGHAN POLEGA. Is seeking her doctoral degree in diversity and equity in
education from University of Illinois, USA. Currently she serves as adjunct instructor in
the College of Urban Education at Davenport University, USA.
ROQUE DO CARMO AMORIM NETO. Received his doctoral degree in educational
leadership from Saint Mary’s College of California, USA.
REBECCA BRILOWSKI . Earned her master’s degree in urban education at Davenport
University, where she serves as adjunct instructor.
KRISTIN BAKER. Teaches science at Hope Academy, USA. Currently, she seeks her
master’s degree in urban education at Davenport University.
RECEBIDO: 15/01/2019.
APROVADO: 15/02/2019.