Cited by 111Teacher Education and Leadership StudiesEducational Assessment and ImprovementEducation and Teacher Training

Facilitating a culture of relational trust in school-based action research: recognising the role of middle leaders

Edwards-Groves, Christine, Grootenboer, Peter, Ronnerman, Karin·2016·Educational Action Research

Abstract

Practices such as formal focused professional dialogue groups, coaching conversations, mentoring conversations and professional learning staff meetings have been taken up in schools and pre-schools as part of long-term action research and development activities to improve the learning and teaching practices. The development of relational trust has long been described in the literature as pivotal for the ongoing ‘success’ of such research and development in sites. In this article, we attempt to re-characterise relational trust as it is accounted for by participants in action research. We present data from a cross-nation study of middle leaders from Australian primary schools and Swedish pre-schools. Middle leaders are those teachers who ‘lead across’; they have both an acknowledged position of leadership or responsibility for the practice development of colleagues and a significant teaching role. The larger study examined the practices of middle leaders; and in this article we draw on interview data from one of the case-study sites that illustrate how colleagues in schools recognise the role middle leaders have for facilitating action research and teaching development. This article specifically presents excerpts from semi-structured interviews with 25 teachers, three principals, three executive teachers and three district consultants. Interviewees described how nourishing a culture of relational trust and mutual respect are critical features in the change endeavour. For them, the practices of the middle leader who facilitated the action research were instrumental in developing trust for teacher development. Analysis of participant accounts revealed five dimensions of trust: interpersonal trust, interactional trust, intersubjective trust, intellectual trust, and pragmatic trust.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09650792.2015.1131175

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 61 · Cited by 111

Authors
Edwards-Groves, C., Grootenboer, P., & Ronnerman, K.
Affiliations
  • ,
  • Griffith University (AU)
Venue
Educational Action Research
Published
2016-07-02
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
369-386
ISSN
  • 0965-0792 (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-5074
OpenAlex
W2487193217
Cited by
111
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4
FWCI
36.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Educational Action Research (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Teacher Training
Keywords
relational trust, middle leaders, school-based action research, teacher professional development, school leadership, teacher mentoring, coaching, professional learning communities, elementary school, preschool, trust dimensions, educational change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review