School Leadership and the Bottom Line in Chicago.

By P. B. Sebring, Anthony Bryk. 2000

261 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/186370214ea2aadcd4ea912d98bdebfff6b1952b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Leading Change under Pressure: An Examination of Principal Leadership in Low-Performing Schools (2009, background): “Principals who develop teachers bring them into contact with new ideas (Goldring & Sullivan, 1996; Sebring & Bryk, 2000).”
Principal Leadership and School Performance: An Integration of Transformational and Instructional Leadership (2003, background): “Such an action orientation theoretically encompasses everything a principal does during the day to support the achievement of students and the ability of teachers to teach (Sebring & Bryk, 2000).”
The Relationship Between School Administrators’ Leadership Styles, School Culture, and Organizational Image (2020, background): “the presence of relationships founded on cooperation and trust allow the formation of strong school cultures by affecting the productivity and performances of the school partners (Kukla-Acevedo, 2009; Sebring & Bryk, 2000).”
Leadership for Literacy Coaching: The Principal’s Role in Launching a New Coaching Program (2009, background): “Research also shows a link between student achievement gains and principals’ ability to foster strong social ties among school staff and the community (studies reviewed in Brewster & Railsback, 2003; Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Riehl, 2000; Sebring & Bryk, 2000).”
Developing a Psychometrically Sound Assessment of School Leadership: The VAL-ED as a Case Study (2010, background): “Core components refer to the features of schools that support student learning and teachers’ ability to teach (Marks & Printy, 2003; Sebring & Bryk, 2000).”
From Instructional Leadership to Leadership Capabilities: Empirical Findings and Methodological Challenges (2010, background): “In a related study of Chicago schools, students in improving and high-trust schools “report that they feel safe, sense that teachers care about them and experience greater academic challenge” (Sebring & Bryk, 2000, pp. 442–443).”
Defining Preparation and Professional Development for the Future (2002, background): “As a result, the role definition for the school principal has become increasingly problematic due to the evolving nature of the tasks before him or her (Daresh, Gantner, Dunlap, & Hvizdak, 2000), in particular with the new focus on accountability (Schmoker, 1999; Sebring & Bryk, 2000).”
Exploring the mediating effects of trust on principal leadership and teacher professional learning in Hong Kong primary schools (2016, background): “Sebring and Bryk (2000) identified four ‘‘vital signs’’ for assessing trust in schools: respect, competence, personal regard, integrity.”