Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on the Seco

Similar documents
Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: An Exploratory Stud

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * Experiences of Af

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on Teache

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: * Suggestions of Ways

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp.1-16 DOI: * A Study on Good School

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: 3 * Effects of 9th

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: : Researc

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: Awareness, Supports

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Grounds and Cons

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: : A Study on the Ac

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * Strenghening the Cap

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: * Review of Research

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: A study on Characte

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Analysis of

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: NCS : G * The Analy

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Study on the Pe

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: * The

상담학연구,, SPSS 21.0., t,.,,,..,.,.. (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: IPA * Analysis of Perc

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: (NCS) Method of Con

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * Early Childhood T

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Effect of Paren

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * Discussions on


(5차 편집).hwp

27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: 3 * The Effect of H

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: : A basic research

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: (LiD) - - * Way to

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on Organizi

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Educational Design

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: * The Participant Expe

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: NCS : * A Study on

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp DOI: * (,, )..,., ( ),.

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.1-19 DOI: *,..,,,.,.,,,,.,,,,, ( )

특수교육논총 * ,,,,..,..,, 76.7%.,,,.,,.. * 1. **

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Parents Perception


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on the Opti

., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, 23 3 (, ) () () 25, (),,,, (,,, 2015b). 1 5,

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * Research Subject

ePapyrus PDF Document

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on the Recog

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: ICT * Exploring the Re


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: The Effect of Caree

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: : - Qualitative Met

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Analysis on the E

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: LiD(Learning in Depth)

230 한국교육학연구 제20권 제3호 I. 서 론 청소년의 언어가 거칠어지고 있다. 개ㅅㄲ, ㅆㅂ놈(년), 미친ㅆㄲ, 닥쳐, 엠창, 뒤져 등과 같은 말은 주위에서 쉽게 들을 수 있다. 말과 글이 점차 된소리나 거센소리로 바뀌고, 외 국어 남용과 사이버 문화의 익명성 등


<C7D1B1B9B1B3C0B0B0B3B9DFBFF85FC7D1B1B9B1B3C0B05F3430B1C733C8A35FC5EBC7D5BABB28C3D6C1BE292DC7A5C1F6C6F7C7D42E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A S

歯1.PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: : C An Exploration


.,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,, (, 2011)..,,, (, 2009)., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994;, 1995), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, (, 201


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * Relationship among

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Research Trend

,,,.,,,, (, 2013).,.,, (,, 2011). (, 2007;, 2008), (, 2005;,, 2007).,, (,, 2010;, 2010), (2012),,,.. (, 2011:,, 2012). (2007) 26%., (,,, 2011;, 2006;

학교폭력사건 처리과정에 개입한 전문상담교사의 경험연구

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * Difference in Paren

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * A Study on the Resea

< FC3D6C1BEBCF6C1A45FB1E2B5B6B1B3B1B3C0B0B3EDC3D E687770>

상담학연구. 10,,., (CQR).,,,,,,.,,.,,,,. (Corresponding Author): / / 567 Tel: /

歯14.양돈규.hwp

<28C0DAB7E1C1FD2920C4DDB7CEC4FBBEF62034C2F720C6EDC1FDBABB2E687770>

118 김정민 송신철 심규철 을 미치기 때문이다(강석진 등, 2000; 심규철 등, 2001; 윤치원 등, 2005; 하태경 등, 2004; Schibeci, 1983). 모둠 내에서 구성원들이 공동으 로 추구하는 학습 목표의 달성을 위하여 각자 맡은 역할에 따라 함께

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: A Critical Reflecti

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

최종ok-1-4.hwp

ePapyrus PDF Document

<31335FB1C7B0E6C7CABFDC2E687770>

석사논문연구계획서

pdf 16..


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: - K * The Analysis

한국교양교육학회/전국대학교양교육협의회/한국교양기초교육원 주최 2015 추계전국학술대회 프로그램 주제 교양교육의 : 당면과제와 전망 일시 : 2015년 11월 20일(금) 14:00~19:00, 21일(토) 09:00~17:00 장소 : 경남대학교 1공학관(공과대학 6층

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: The Effects of Pare

27 2, * ** 3, 3,. B ,.,,,. 3,.,,,,..,. :,, : 2009/09/03 : 2009/09/21 : 2009/09/30 * ICAD (Institute for Children Ability

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Basic Study on t

50-5대지05장후은.indd

도비라

歯5-2-13(전미희외).PDF

04±èºÎ¼º

. 45 1,258 ( 601, 657; 1,111, 147). Cronbach α=.67.95, 95.1%, Kappa.95.,,,,,,.,...,.,,,,.,,,,,.. :,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Structural Rel

54 한국교육문제연구제 27 권 2 호, I. 1.,,,,,,, (, 1998). 14.2% 16.2% (, ), OECD (, ) % (, )., 2, 3. 3

10¿ÀÁ¤ÁØ

KD hwp

서론 34 2

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: The Exploratory Stu

03신경숙내지작업


요 약 제품혁신은 기업 생존의 열쇠이지만, 그 노력에 비해 성과는 미흡하다. 기업의 제품혁 신 노력을 나타내는 R&D 집약도는 한국기업의 경우 2005년 3.2%로 OECD 30개국 중 4위이 지만, 제품혁신 활동을 수행하거나 높은 차원의 혁신제품을 개발하는 기업 비율

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: A Qualitative Case

:,,.,. 456, 253 ( 89, 164 ), 203 ( 44, 159 ). Cronbach α= ,.,,..,,,.,. :,, ( )

216 동북아역사논총 41호 인과 경계공간은 설 자리를 잃고 배제되고 말았다. 본고에서는 근세 대마도에 대한 한국과 일본의 인식을 주로 영토와 경계인 식을 중심으로 고찰하고자 한다. 이 시기 대마도에 대한 한일 양국의 인식을 살펴볼 때는 근대 국민국가적 관점에서 탈피할

Transcription:

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp.389-411 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.28.4.201812.389 A Study on the Secondary School Teachers' Perceptions of the Teacher Leadership and the Feasibility of the Teacher Leadership in China Purpose: The purpose of this study was to check the level of teacher leadership in China and to explore the policy directions for the feasibility of the teacher leadership. Method: The TLSS(Teacher Leadership School Survey) by Katzenmeyer & Moller(2009) was used to explore teachers perceptions. The primary data for this study were obtained from 253 secondary teachers in China. Results: The perceptions of the teachers about teacher leadership were somewhat positive(m=3.35). They perceived the collegiality of the seven categories of teacher leadership as the most positive factor. Conclusion: The positive perception of the collegiality and the positive environment would affect the teacher leadership positively. However, school administrators are required to recognize the importance of the shared leadership and set the school conditions for professional leadership. A professional learning community(plc) could be suggested as a way for the teacher leadership development. Key words : teacher leadership, teacher leadership in China, TLSS Corresponding Author: Joo, Chul-An. Pusan National University, Dept. of Education, Busandaehak-ro 63 beon-gil, Geumieong-gu, Busan, Korea, e-mail: cajoo@pusan.ac.kr

. 20 (Smylie, Conley & Marks, 2005). - (, 2011)., (, 2015).., (PENG, C.,, 2015).,,. (Danielson, 2006; Dylan, 2016; Mulford & Silins, 2003; Philip, 2012) (O Connor & Boles, 1992)..,, - (Team-Member Exchange) (,,, 2016;,, 2013;,, 2012).,, (, 2008)., (,, 2012). Katzenmeyer Moller(2009) TLSS (2011). (2011).

. 2004, 2006 (, 2006;, 2006).., (, 2008;,,, 2014;,, 2009)., (, 2010;, 2011;,, 2010)., (,, 2016;,, 2012;,, 2017).. (,, 2016;,, 2012). (Harris et al., 2013; Roland, 2001; Zepeda, Mayers, & Benson, 2013)... (), (), () ()... (shared leadership), Gronn(2000).

. Lieberman(1992). 16 Copland (Copland, 2003). (Stone, Horejs, & Lomas, 1997).., (Smylie, 1995), (Blase & Anderson, 1995), (Stone, Horejs, & Lomas, 1997).,., (Dylan, 2016; Leithwood & Jantzi, 1998), (Mary & Pamela, 2013)., (Crowther, 2003as cited in Muijs & Harris)., (Katzenmeyer & Moller, 2009; Ovando, 1996; Fackler & Malmberg, 2016)., (Sickler, 1988; Weiner, 2011), (O Connor & Boles, 1992)., (Harris et al., 2013) (, 2008; Philip, 2012).. (, 2009;,,, 2016),, (,, 2015). (, 2010), (, 2014)... Smylie(1995) Paul Bredeson, Renee Clift, Robert Crowson, Michael Fullan, David

Hansen, Kenneth Leithwood, Ann Lieberman, Karen Seashore Louis, R. Bruce McPherson Joseph Murphy. Stone, Horejs Lomas(1997). Gunter(2006), Danielson(2006),. Katzenmeyer Moller(2009),,. de Villiers Pretorius(2011), Eargle(2013), Struyve, Meredit Gielen(2014), Hairon, Goh Chua(2015), Wilson(2016) Katzenmeyer Moller(2009). Katzenmeyer Moller(2009) 7. Katzenmeyer Moller(2009) 7 (developmental focus), (recognition), (autonomy), (collegiality), (participation), (open communication), (positive environment). (developmental focus). (recognition),. (autonomy). (collegiality). (participation).

(open communication). (positive environment)... 4,,,.,. (), (), (), () 2017 4 1 8 8 52 300, 253. < -1>. n % 63 24.9 190 75.1 153 60.5 100 39.5

( ) n % 5 86 34.0 5 10 23 9.1 10 15 18 7.1 15 20 30 11.9 20 25 44 17.4 25 52 20.5 31 12.2 177 70.0 41 16.2 4 1.6 253 100.0 (Teacher Leadership School Survey: TLSS). TLSS(Katzenmeyer & Katzenmeyer, 2005), (Wills, 2015). TLSS (developmental focus), (recognition), (autonomy), (collegiality), (participation), (open communication), (positive environment) 7. 7 49, (,,,, ). (,, 2012) TLSS,.. TLSS Cronbach s α.98, Cronbach s α.873.921.

< -2> TLSS. 1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Cronbach's α 25 26 27 28 7.906 7.887 7.873 7.913

( ) Cronbach's α 29 30 31 7.940 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47,, 48, 49 7.908 7.921 49.98 SPSS 24.,.,..

. < -1>. N M SD 253 3.45.790 253 3.46.732 253 3.30.750 253 3.49.753 253 3.11.948 253 3.29.809 253 3.34.814 3.35.715 3.35. (M=3.49),,., (M=3.11).,,,,,,. 1) 전문성개발 < -2>.

M SD 6 28 82 92 45 (2.4) (11.1) (32.4) (36.4) (17.8) 3.56.985 10 55 89 59 40 (4.0) (21.7) (35.2) (23.3) (15.8) 3.25 1.087 9 38 101 68 37 (3.6) (15.0) (39.9) (26.9) (14.6) 3.34 1.017 7 35 101 67 43, (2.8) (13.8) (39.9) (26.5) (17.0) 3.41 1.014 3 20 113 75 42 (1.2) (7.9) (44.7) (29.6) (16.6) 3.53.902 6 16 107 80 44 (2.4) (6.3) (42.3) (31.6) (17.4) 3.55.931 6 27 102 75 43 (2.4) (10.7) (40.3) (29.6) (17.0) 3.48.974 3.45.79 3.45 7. (M=3.56), (M=3.55), (M=3.53)., (M=3.25). 2) 인정감 < -3>. 7 (2.8) 3 (1.2) 17 (6.7) 18 (17.1) 109 (43.1) 114 (45.1) 73 (28.9) 72 (28.5) 47 (18.6) 46 (18.2) M SD 3.54.961 3.55.910

( ) M SD 3 7 111 85 47 (1.2) (2.8) (43.9) (33.6) (18.6) 3.66.852 7 46 96 76 28 (2.8) (18.2) (37.9) (30.0) (11.1) 3.28.979 13 40 94 72 34 (5.1) (15.8) (37.2) (28.5) (13.4) 3.29 1.051 5 27 107 74 40 (2.0) (10.7) (42.3) (29.2) (15.8) 3.46.949 7 19 114 78 35 (2.8) (7.5) (45.1) (30.8) (13.8) 3.45.919 3.46.73 3.46 7. (M=3.66) (M=3.55), (M=3.54)., (M=3.29), (M=3.28). 3) 자율성 < -4>. 1 (0.4) 12 (4.7) 6 (2.4) 4 (1.6) 12 (4.7) 62 (24.5) 31 (12.3) 17 (6.7) 102 (40.3) 81 (32.0) 110 (43.5) 110 (43.5) 89 (35.2) 66 (26.1) 77 (30.4) 75 (29.6) 49 (19.4) 32 (12.6) 29 (11.5) 47 (18.6) M SD 3.68.851 3.17 1.084 3.36.923 3.57.922

( ) M SD 12 54 95 59 33 (4.7) (21.3) (37.5) (23.3) (13.0) 3.19 1.062 30 63 80 61 19 (11.9) (24.9) (31.6) (24.1) (7.5) 2.91 1.123 10 38 114 63 28 (4.0) (15.0) (45.1) (24.9) (11.1) 3.24.972 3.30.75 3.30 7. (M=3.68), (M=3.57).,,,. (M=2.91). 4) 동료간협조관계 < -5>. 5 (2.0) 4 (1.6) 2 (0.8) 4 (1.6) 6 (2.4) 21 (8.3) 36 (14.2) 24 (9.5) 14 (5.5) 19 (7.5) 109 (43.1) 101 (39.9) 118 (46.6) 107 (42.3) 112 (44.3) 76 (30.0) 77 (30.4) 70 (27.7) 82 (32.4) 80 (31.6) 42 (16.6) 35 (13.8) 39 (15.4) 46 (18.2) 36 (14.2) M SD 3.51.933 3.41.949 3.47.893 3.60.901 3.48.911

( ) M SD 8 20 111 79 35 (3.2) (7.9) (43.9) (31.2) (13.8) 3.45.935 7 22 104 73 47 (2.8) (8.7) (41.1) (28.9) (18.6) 3.52.982 3.49.75 3.49 7. (M=3.60) (M=3.52), (M=3.51)., (M=3.41). 5) 의사결정에의참여 < -6>. M SD 20 47 96 55 35 (7.9) (18.6) (37.9) (21.7) (13.8) 3.15 1.120 20 56 86 63 28 (7.9) (22.1) (34.0) (24.9) (11.1) 3.09 1.107 23 57 85 65 23 (9.1) (22.5) (33.6) (25.7) (9.1) 3.03 1.101 13 47 91 75 27 (5.1) (18.6) (36.0) (29.6) (10.7) 3.22 1.034 29 66 79 51 28 (11.5) (26.1) (31.2) (20.2) (11.1) 2.93 1.168 22 50 85 67 29 (8.7) (19.8) (33.6) (26.5) (11.5) 3.12 1.122 16 48 92 67 30 (6.3) (19.0) (36.4) (26.5) (11.9) 3.19 1.073 3.10.95

3.10 7. (M=3.22) (M=3.19)., (M=2.93). 6) 개방적의사소통 < -7>. M SD 18 49 102 59 25 (7.1) (19.4) (40.3) (23.3) (9.9) 3.09 1.050 18 46 96 63 30 (7.1) (18.2) (37.9) (24.9) (11.9) 3.16 1.081 15 38 105 68 27 (5.9) (15.0) (41.5) (26.9) (10.7) 3.21 1.021 8 26 108 75 36 (3.2) (10.3) (42.7) (29.6) (14.2) 3.42.962 5 20 117 72 39 (2.0) (7.9) (46.2) (28.5) (15.4) 3.47.915 9 27 104 78 35 (3.6) (10.7) (41.1) (30.8) (13.8) 3.41.974 17 37 94 78 27 (6.7) (14.6) (37.2) (30.8) (10.7) 3.24 1.047 3.29.81 3.29 7. (M=3.47) (M=3.42), (M=3.41)., (M=3.09).

7) 긍정적환경 < -8>. M SD 4 13 118 79 39 (1.6) (5.1) (46.6) (31.2) (15.4) 3.54.870 10 50 98 63 32 (4.0) (19.8) (38.7) (24.9) (12.6) 3.23 1.032 10 35 100 79 29 (4.0) (13.8) (39.5) (31.2) (11.5) 3.32.983 21 41 100 61 30 (8.3) (16.2) (39.5) (24.1) (11.9) 3.15 1.092,, 12 34 106 66 35 (4.7) (13.4) (41.9) (26.1) (13.8) 3.31 1.023 11 37 101 74 30, (4.3) (14.6) (39.9) (29.2) (11.9) 3.30 1.002 4 21 105 84 39 (1.6) (8.3) (41.5) (33.2) (15.4) 3.53.907 3.34.81 3.34 7. (M=3.54) (M=3.53)., (M=3.15)...,. 7

,,,,,., 7..,.. 49..,...,,,.....

.....,.,,,.,..,...,.,,.,.. (shared leadership),.,..,,, (, 2008).

(,, 2010)..,,,,,,.. 4,,, 253..,. FGI.,.. (2015).. (1), 339-370.,, (2016).. (2), 240-245. (2008).. (3), 47-73., (2013).,, - (Tmx). (1), 203-229., (2012).,. (2), 133-158., (2010).. (4), 149-176. Peng, C., (2015). : Eaq (2009-2013). (1), 171-199.

(2008).. 23-47. (2011).. (1), 77-106., (2016). (TLMS). (4), 49-56. (2011). :. (6). 107-112., (2015).. (2), 96-100. (2010). :. 47-51. (2006).. (33), 1-5. (2014).. (2), 16-17. (2009).. (2), 84-86. (2006).. 48. (2008).. (8), 52-57.,, (2014). :. (41), 93-103., (2017).. (3), 83-88.,, (2016). 180., (2009).. 28-31., (2010).. 42-45., (2012).. (5), 111-116. Blase, J., & Anderson, G. (1995). The micropolitics of educational leadership: From control to empowerment. London: Cassell. doi:10.5860/choice.34-1056 Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4), 375-395. doi:10.3102/01623737025004375 Crowther, F., Hann, L., McMaster, J., & Ferguson, M. (2000). Leadership for successful school revitalization: Lessons from recent Australian research. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum development. de Villiers, E., & Pretorius, S. G. (2011). Democracy in schools: are educators ready for teacher leadership? South African Journal of Education 31(4), 574-589. doi:10.15700/saje.v31n4a453

Dylan, W. (2016). Leadership for teacher learning: Creating a culture where all teachers improve so that all students succeed. Learning Sciences International. Eargle, J. C. (2013). I'm not a bystander": Developing teacher leadership in a rural school- university collaboration. The Rural Educator, 35(1), 23-33. Fackler, S., & Malmberg, L. E. (2016). Teachers' self-efficacy in 14 OECD countries: Teacher, student group, school and leadership effects. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 185-195. Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed properties: A new architecture for leadership. Educational Management and Administration, 28(3), 317-338. doi:10.1177/0263211x000283006 Gunter, H. (2006). Teacher leadership: Challenges and opportunities. Scottish Educational Review, 37, 114-123. Hairon, S., Goh, J. W. P., & Chua, C. S. K. (2015). Teacher leadership enactment in professional learning community contexts: Towards a better understanding of the phenomenon. School Leadership and Management, 35(2), 163-182. doi:10.1080/13632434.2014.992776 Harris, A., Hopkins, D., Day, C., Hadfield, M., Hargreaves, A., & Chapman, C. (2013). Effective leadership for school improvement. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203754849 Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2009). Awakening the sleeping giant. Helping teachers develop as leaders (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Katzenmeyer, W., & Katzenmeyer, M. (2005). Teacher leader school survey. Tampa, FL: Professional Development Center. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1998). Distributed leadership and student engagement in school. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Diego, CA. Lieberman, A. (1992). Teacher leadership: What are we learning? In C. Livingston (Ed.), Teachers as leaders: Evolving roles (pp. 159-165). Washington, DC: National Education Association of the United States. Mary, L. D., & Pamela S. A. (2013). Teacher leadership and collective efficacy: Connections and links. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 4(1), 1-13. Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership-improvement through empowerment? An overview of the literature. Educational Management Administration Leadership, 30(4), 437-448. doi: 10.1177/0263211x030314007 Mulford, B., & Silins, H. (2003). Leadership for organisational learning and improved student outcomes. Cambridge Journal of Education. 33(2), 175-195. O Connor, K., & Boles, K. (1992). Assessing the needs of teacher leaders in Massachusetts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, CA. Ovando, M. (1996). Teacher leadership: Opportunities and challenges. Planning and Changing, 27(1/2),

30-44. Philip, E. (2012). Teacher leadership and professional development: Examining links between two concepts central to school improvement. Professional Development in Education, 38(2), 169-188. Roland, S. B. (2001). Teacher leader. Research Article, 82(6), 443-449. doi:10.1177/003172170108200607 Sickler, J. L. (1988). Teachers in charge: Empowering the professionals. Phi Delta Kappan, 69(5), 354-356, 375-376. Smylie, M. A. (1995). New perspectives on teacher leadership. The Elementary School Journal, 6(1), 3-7. doi:10.1086/461811 Smylie, M. A., Conley S., & Marks H. (2005). Exploring new approaches to teacher leadership for school improvement. In J. Murphy (Ed.) The Educational Leadership Challenge: Redefining Leadership for the 21st Century. University of Chicago Press. Stone, M., Horejs, J., & Lomas, A. (1997). Commonalities and differences in teacher leadership at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Action in Teacher Education, 19(3), 49-64. doi: 10.1080/01626620.1997.10462878 Struyve, C., Meredith, C., & Gielen, S. (2014). Who am I and where do I belong? The perception and evaluation of teacher leaders concerning teacher leadership practices and micropolitics in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 15(2), 203-230. doi:10.1007/s10833-013-9226-5 Weiner, J. (2011). Finding common ground: Teacher leaders and principals speak out about teacher leadership. Journal of School Leadership, 21(1), 7-41. Wills, A. (2015). A case study of teacher leadership at an elementary school. Unpublished Certifcate of Advanced Study Tesis, Sacred Heart University, Fairfeld, CT. Wilson, A. (2016). From professional practice to practical leader: Teacher leadership in professional learning communities. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 7(2), 45-62. Zepeda, S. J., Mayers, R..S., & Benson, B. (2013). The call to teacher leadership. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315852690 : 2018.10.30. / : 2018.11.12. / : 2018.12.20.

:. : Katzenmeyer & Moller(2009) (TLSS) 253. :.,,,,,. :., (shared leadership).,.