Teacher Leadership: Rationales, Constraints, and Preconditions

School leaders are faced daily with the questions of how to bring change and make improvements in the complex school environment, gain widespread buy-in for change initiatives, and keep faculty engaged. Recent models of organizational leadership suggest that these and other questions might be addressed through a distribution of leadership throughout an organization, rather than its being the province of a small number of leaders in formal positions (Monica Taylor, Goeke, Klein, Onore, & Geist, 2011; Weiner, 2011). In an educational setting, this suggests that teachers should step into leadership roles.

The following analysis is motivated by the following questions: Could the development of teacher leadership be an effective means of making a school a more effective teaching and learning environment? What challenges might present themselves in adopting this model? The analysis first identifies theoretical justifications for teacher leadership, by summarizing work on distributed and teacher leadership by James Spillane and Alma Harris. It then explores the experience of teacher leadership in a number of educational settings by analyzing the rationales and challenges associated with teacher leadership uncovered by empirical research. From the findings of the analysis a set of guiding questions emerges that any leader in an educational setting should be able to answer before embarking on the project of teacher leadership.


Theoretical Underpinnings of Teacher Leadership
James Spillane has described distributed leadership as a counter to the prevailing “heroics of leadership,” (Spillane, 2008, p. 143) whereby the quality of leadership is defined not as the knowledge and skill held by an individual or small group of leaders, but as an emergent property of the interactions among people, and between people and their situation. Much school-based leadership research takes a ‘positional leadership’ perspective, focusing on the difference the principal makes, and leaves out other possible sources of leadership in the school that a distributed model of leadership offers (Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2004). The distributed model takes as its premise the notion that an approach to leadership which relies on building the knowledge of a single leader is not the most effective use of school resources.

In Spillane’s conception of distributed leadership, then, leadership results from an interaction between leaders, followers, and situation. Followers themselves play a constitutive role in leadership; and the situation, comprising elements such as organizational structure, culture and particular artifacts such as meeting agendas, rather than being a mere backdrop or container for leadership activity or set of accessories used by the leader to execute leadership, is in fact one of its components, both enabling and constraining leadership practice. The “collective cognitive properties” (Spillane et al., 2004, p. 18) emerging in a group of leaders, followers, and their situation result in forms of leadership practice in which the whole is more than the sum of these individual components (Spillane, 2008; Spillane et al., 2004). Leadership does not emanate from an individual leader, but is stretched over the organization, and the focus is on the enactment of leadership tasks by and through multiple participants and the structure, culture, and artifacts of the situation (Spillane et al., 2004). For example, the execution of a macro-task such as teacher evaluation comprises a number of micro-tasks such as classroom observation, review of teacher documentation, and the evaluation meeting. These micro-tasks might be spread across the school principal, peer observers and evaluators, the teachers being evaluated, the established system for evaluation, observation protocols, evaluation forms, and so on, that together comprise the leadership task of teacher evaluation. Consequently, focusing on the knowledge, skills, and behaviors of individual leaders, or even solely on teacher leaders, is not likely, in Spillane’s view, to yield much insight into the nature of leadership practice in schools (Spillane et al., 2004). Indeed, definitions of leadership used in distributed leadership may not be recognizable to those accustomed to positional leadership models. For example, Gardner (2007), taking a positional approach, defined leadership as “the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or leadership team) induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or her followers” (p. 17). In contrast, Spillane et al. (2004) defined leadership as “the identification, acquisition, allocation, co-ordination, and use of the social, material, and cultural resources necessary to establish the conditions for the possibility of teaching and learning,” (Spillane et al., 2004, p. 11) thereby taking the focus away from the activities of particular individuals.

Important to note is that Spillane does not prescribe or recommend distributed leadership as a means to more effective leadership. Distributed leadership is not normative, in other words, but a framework or lens for analyzing leadership in organizations (Spillane et al., 2004). However, distributed leadership theory helps in reconceptualizing teacher leadership in schools: it creates a broader theoretical lens that makes it possible to consider leadership as being a product of more than the skills, knowledge, and practices, of the formal leader, in contrast to much of the leadership literature – particularly popular leadership books (e.g. Kouzes & Posner, 2008; Maxwell, 2007; Rath & Conchie, 2009).

Alma Harris has drawn on distributed leadership theory, including the work of Spillane (Harris, Leithwood, Day, Sammons, & Hopkins, 2007), to outline a theory of teacher leadership which is more normative in nature. Harris concurs with Spillane that the challenge in analyzing leadership is to go beyond the individual leader to consider how leadership is stretched over multiple actors, and is executed through their interaction. For Harris, it is collective or shared practices that contribute to organizational change and development, and the focus of attention is expanded beyond the individual leader to an examination of leadership practice emerging through complex interactions in the organization (Harris, 2006).

Harris and her colleagues have taken up a notion of Spillane’s (2006) – that of holistic, or person-plus leadership - in exploring the possibilities for the application of distributed leadership in particular situations (Harris et al., 2007). Person-plus leadership is a consciously managed attempt to spread leadership among multiple actors in an organization, through behaviors such as the careful consideration of the tasks and functions of those providing leadership, and agreement among participants on which tasks and functions are best carried out by which actors. Using distributed leadership theory in a normative sense involves analyzing how leadership functions are distributed in particular organizations, and the effects of differing configurations of leadership (Harris, 2006). This line of investigation has revealed that there are perils involved in distributing leadership, such as conflicting priorities and competing leadership styles. However, student outcomes may improve as a result of distributed leadership (Harris et al., 2007).

Harris and Muijs have applied distributed leadership theory to school improvement, and specifically to teacher leadership, which they characterize as “not a formal role, responsibility or set of tasks, it is more a form of agency where teachers are empowered to lead development work that impacts directly upon the quality of teaching and learning.” (Harris & Muijs, 2003, p. 40) In Harris and Muijs’ conception, teacher leadership is a form of collective leadership in which teacher expertise is developed through collaborative activity. The prerequisites for teacher leadership include teacher empowerment, time for leadership work, and professional development opportunities. (Harris & Muijs, 2003)

Harris and her colleagues make clear that distributing leadership does not in itself bring benefits; these are related to the configurations of teacher leadership in particular schools (Harris, 2006; Harris et al., 2007). This implies and leads to a research agenda that examines the implications of implementing teacher leadership, and in particular the prerequisites, the constraints, and the challenges of teacher leadership. Although Harris et al. (2007) claimed that more research needs to be done, an analysis of empirical studies of teacher leadership yields preliminary insights that may guide anyone exploring the possibility of implementing teacher leadership in an educational setting.

Hence, from Spillane’s theory that views leadership through a distributed frame, to Harris’s application of a distributed model to teacher leadership, the empirical investigation of teacher leadership rests on a theoretical foundation that takes the focus away from the one ‘heroic’ leader. Drawing on this theoretical foundation, empirical research reveals teacher leadership in a variety of manifestations, with prerequisites, constraints, and challenges in implementation that one would expect to find when abstract theory gives way to messy reality.

Characterizing Teacher Leadership
Because teacher leadership is enacted differently depending on the setting, it is also characterized in various ways depending on how researchers view leadership in each setting. Teacher leaders have been characterized as having an expanded role, as researchers, scholars, and mentors (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011). Teacher leadership is “an exhibited form of distributed leadership…the critical element in creating and sustaining any successful professional learning community supporting a respect of teaching, impacting on both school and classroom levels.” (Nicolaidou, 2010, p. 226) In one study, teacher leadership meant an opportunity for teachers to shift their roles from follower to leader in order to enable them to handle a decentralizing education system through collective leadership (Emira, 2010). Teacher leadership has been described as informal, involving such activities as taking the initiative on decisions and communicating ideas to others, in contrast with the more formal leadership roles of positional leaders (Emira, 2010). In Muijs and Harris’ (2007) own empirical research, it was described as a form of distributed leadership that is narrow in the sense that it focuses on teachers, yet broader than established conceptions of distributed leadership in that it extends the scope of leadership to informal roles and activities. It can be a process operating in organizations that is inspired by “an internal search for meaning, relevance and connection,” (Muijs & Harris, 2006) and includes leadership for teaching and learning both inside and outside the classroom.
Teacher leadership activities include collaborating with colleagues or supporting colleagues in the classroom, exercising autonomy, making decisions, delivering workshops, linking schools to their communities, and solving problems (Emira, 2010). Other activities include teachers giving presentations to their colleagues on ways to improve teaching, and allowing themselves to be observed by their colleagues (Margolis & Deuel, 2009); and improving colleagues’ ability to assess students, working to ensure consistency of assessment among teachers, supporting professional learning communities, and even supporting new teacher leaders (Mike Taylor, Yates, Meyer, & Kinsella, 2011).

Examples of teacher leadership roles in the literature include ‘consulting teachers’ and ‘specialist classroom teachers’ who were differentiated from their teacher colleagues but who remained rooted in the classroom and not placed on a managerial track (Lovett & Cameron, 2011); ‘teacher connectors,’ whose role was to identify veteran teachers with expertise and connect them with novice teachers (Weiner, 2011); teachers who analyzed school culture and realized opportunities to affect the culture for the better (Roby, 2011); teachers working on a grant-funded project to improve content area literacy teaching and learning (Margolis & Deuel, 2009); and teachers as subject experts providing advice and support to their colleagues (Mike Taylor, Yates, et al., 2011). The diversity of definitions and examples illustrates the dangers of attempting to make generalizations about teacher leadership, or of viewing teacher leadership per se as a nostrum for school improvement or change.

Motivations of Teachers to Become Leaders
Teachers have various motivations for wanting to enter into leadership roles. Margolis and Deuel (2009) found a mixture of extrinsic and intrinsic motivators. Among extrinsic motivators is recognition for taking on extra duties (although teachers may not be interested in leadership job titles or indeed may be embarrassed by too much or too formal recognition). Increased financial compensation may also be an important consideration for some teachers. Among intrinsic motivations, Margolis and Deuel (2009) identified possibilities for professional growth (albeit linked in some cases to aspirations for professional advancement), and also a sense of moral duty on the part of some teachers who felt they were doing what needed to be done. One particular teacher leader studied by Lovett and Cameron (2011) gained rewards from the recognition she received from her colleagues based on her increasing teaching expertise that resulted from her leadership role, and a sense of fulfillment from helping other teachers improve their teaching.

In a profession which lacks a clear upward career path and recognition for expertise in teaching and learning, and in which professional development may not be tailored to the differentiated needs, interests, and perspectives of individuals (Mike Taylor, Yates, et al., 2011), many teachers who step into leadership positions are motivated by a need to feel engaged in their professional career and to develop professionally (Lovett & Cameron, 2011). Specifically, teachers may be motivated by a desire to identify, amplify, deepen, and broaden their professional voice, and expand their influence (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011). For some teachers, the motivation comes only after they have entered into their leadership roles and they see themselves not merely as receivers of knowledge, but as makers of meaning, and as individuals who can identify institutional needs and make use of institutional structures to bring change (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011).
Teachers working as Senior Subject Advisors in New Zealand found that opportunities such as advising teachers on their teaching and assessment practices, and developing learning communities, nurtured them personally and professionally, and refreshed their commitment to the profession (Mike Taylor, Yates, et al., 2011). For teachers in Cyprus, in reaction to increased state control and standardization in the school system, leadership meant re-professionalizing their work by creating “professional learning communities” in which “teachers, teams, head teachers, advisers and pupils work together in a collegial way” (Nicolaidou, 2010).
Challenges and Constraints in Implementing Teacher Leadership
Teachers who are embarking on leadership roles may not initially see themselves as leaders, because of hierarchical, top-down organizational structures and controlling administrators (Nicolaidou, 2010). The process of becoming a teacher leader requires that teachers adapt their view of teaching to include leadership. This requires that teachers see themselves differently, or “re-conceptualise the boundaries of their role schemas to include ‘teacher leadership’ roles and responsibilities” (Dawson, 2011). Role schema refers to the way that individuals are socialized to view professional roles. Teachers may have a strong role schema, shared with their colleagues, for their roles as teachers, but not for the role of teacher leader. They may see themselves primarily as classroom practitioners, and may be reluctant to identify themselves as leaders or to step into a leadership role; or they may lack confidence in themselves as leaders, and in some cases lack leadership skills (Muijs & Harris, 2007). Hence, teachers may struggle to construct for themselves an identity as teacher leader, and there may not be a clear schema for this role, given that teacher leadership roles are created in response to the exigencies of particular educational circumstances; in particular, teachers are socialized to be followers, not leaders, and overcoming this particular self-conception may present a particularly difficult challenge (Dawson, 2011). The shift to seeing themselves as leaders may happen as teachers discover their ‘professional voice’ while they perform the role of leader – for example by conducting action research or negotiating the curriculum. This is associated with their seeing themselves as meaning makers rather than receivers of knowledge, and with coming to see their teacher leader identity as one they have created themselves rather than its being imposed on them (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011). In turn, the discovery of their professional voice can lead to teachers seeing themselves as agents of change in the organization, in a process that has been characterized as “reframing their work and constructing widening circles of influence and impact” (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011, p. 926) as they shift their focus beyond the classroom and come to understand not only what needs to be changed but how to use organizational structures to achieve their goals.

Along with teachers’ internal struggles to change their role schema as they seek to define their identity as leaders, comes an external struggle against prevailing professional norms that govern teachers’ interactions with those in their environment: other teachers, administrators, students, and even the broader community (Margolis & Deuel, 2009; Weiner, 2011). Although it has been argued that teachers teaching teachers is good professional development, on the assumption that teachers are more accepting of advice from colleagues than from outside experts (Mike Taylor, Yates, et al., 2011), teacher leaders may experience difficulty giving feedback to their peers even if they have been granted access to their classrooms, because of an egalitarian culture among teachers that establishes expectations around what is acceptable for teachers to say to each other. In the case of the ‘teacher connectors’ in Weiner’s (2011) study, conceptions of the teacher connector role were subject to the “powerful effect” (Weiner, 2011, p. 34) of established professional norms not only among the teacher connectors, but also among the principals in the schools where the research took place.

As a result of teacher role schemata and professional norms, teachers who step into leadership roles, and therefore behave in ways that do not conform to teacher norms, may be subject to disapproval from their teacher colleagues, and they may even fear the reactions of their colleagues (Dawson, 2011), who are accustomed to an egalitarian ethic or react negatively to being told what to do (Margolis & Deuel, 2009). This may be more of a problem in situations in which teacher leadership is formalized or built into the institutional hierarchy (Margolis & Deuel, 2009).

The reaction of colleagues may act as a barrier to teacher leadership (Nicolaidou, 2010); alternatively, it may be something teacher leaders adapt to. Weiner’s (2011) ‘teacher connectors’ made efforts to emphasize the knowledge and skill background held in common with their colleagues, and to downplay their difference in status, even as they encountered antipathy from veteran teachers (though less so from younger or novice teachers) toward institutional change. Weiner (2011) concluded from this that training in how to cope with resistance from other teachers is a necessary ingredient in the success of teacher leadership. Another approach to addressing fixed role schemata and professional norms, and the problem of colleague reaction, is described by Dawson (2011). In the Australian schools he studied, the successful transition to a teacher leadership model was facilitated by the introduction of a school-wide program that demanded collaboration across the school as a means to school improvement, and familiarized teachers and staff with the concept of ‘parallel leadership,’ a form of applied distributed leadership. Among other benefits, presenting teacher leadership within an explicit conceptual framework “legitimized the actions of ‘teacher leaders’” and “enhanced the opportunities for teachers to re-conceptualise the boundaries of their role schemas to include ‘teacher leadership’ roles and responsibilities.” (Dawson, 2011, pp. 23–24)

For teacher leaders to be successful, they need support from the institution, their colleagues, and those they report to, support which some researchers have found to be lacking (Lovett & Cameron, 2011). In particular, the principal or head teacher appears to play a decisive role in the success of teacher leadership, with the potential to play an enabling or inhibiting role for teacher leaders (Nicolaidou, 2010). Principals may prevent the success of teacher leadership by failing to support teacher leaders, appropriately re-define roles, or see teacher leadership in the framework of larger institutional goals. In elevating some teachers to leadership roles they may fail to acknowledge the culture of egalitarianism among teachers, which may lead to resistance on the part of other teachers (who are unwilling to take direction from a fellow teacher) and isolation on the part of teacher leaders (Weiner, 2011). Additionally, principals may be influenced by the same professional and organizational norms as teachers, and this influence may work to reinforce traditional teacher norms as well as fail to establish teacher leadership as a separate and different role (Weiner, 2011). Principals may recruit inappropriate individuals into teacher leadership roles; they may lack the skills or may be too overburdened to support teacher leadership, or they may lack the vision that integrates teacher leadership into broader institutional goals (Weiner, 2011). Institutional pressures can prevent a principal from supporting teacher leadership, such as in a case of ‘restricted teacher leadership’ described by Muijs and Harris (2007) in which the principal was attempting to turn a failing school around, a situation that may require decisive, top-down leadership and not the more collaborative, consensus-seeking approach associated with teacher leadership.

Finally, a significant impediment to the success of teacher leadership is the lack of adequate time (Margolis & Deuel, 2009; Muijs & Harris, 2006, 2007; Weiner, 2011). Teachers are often too occupied with their students – particularly if they are working with difficult students – to be able to engage in leadership roles, which may be seen as a ‘luxury’ activity (Muijs & Harris, 2007). Teacher leadership can be emotionally draining for teacher leaders working with underperforming teachers, particularly if they wear the dual hats of supporter and supervisor (Lovett & Cameron, 2011). Hence, senior administrators should ensure that teacher leaders’ workloads are structured in such a way that they can devote sufficient time to the leadership role and their teaching duties.

Keys to Successful Teacher Leadership
Various benefits are associated with teacher leadership, including greater inclusivity in decision-making (Muijs & Harris, 2007), teachers feeling supported, effectiveness in achieving systemic reform, connecting teachers to networking opportunities, (Mike Taylor, Yates, et al., 2011), and teacher empowerment that leads to greater motivation and retention (Muijs & Harris, 2006; Mike Taylor, Yates, et al., 2011). All these benefits may result in greater school effectiveness. Yet successful teacher leadership depends on a number of preconditions, and brings challenges for individual teachers and their institutions. Perhaps this is why it is not yet widely established in schools (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011).

The literature reveals how important it is for the principal or head teacher provide support and direction for teacher leadership in the institution (Muijs & Harris, 2006). Teacher leadership has a greater chance of success when the principal integrates it into a larger vision of reform for the school, which may require them to “actively scaffold” teacher leaders’ transition into their role, and “provide an overarching goal for their work.” (Weiner, 2011, p. 28). Teacher leadership can succeed where the principal deliberately arranges leadership opportunities and provides moral support to teachers in leadership roles, and nurtures a culture in which teachers are expected to become leaders (Muijs & Harris, 2007). Other preconditions identified by Muijs and Harris, are innovative approaches to professional development, improvement efforts that are coordinated by both teachers and staff, high levels of teacher involvement, creativity resulting from collaboration, and the possibility for recognition and rewards (Muijs & Harris, 2006).

While teacher leadership appears to depend in large part on administrative leadership, teacher leaders may also be nurtured and supported by their colleagues (Monica Taylor, Goeke, et al., 2011). In a school characterized as displaying ‘emergent teacher leadership,’ interviewees described collegiality, meaning the ability to work on shifting teams toward the betterment of the school, as essential for school improvement (Muijs & Harris, 2007).

In addition to the support of the principal and colleagues, two other interrelated conditions that must be in place if teacher leadership is to succeed, were identified by Muijs and Harris (2006): a culture that supports teacher leadership, and structural arrangements in the institution that support a favorable culture. An example of how important these conditions are is given by Nicolaidou (2010): teachers in Cyprus were not able to see themselves as leaders beyond their classroom activities because of what they perceived to be a highly centralized, hierarchical school system and controlling head teachers, all of which restricted their scope of action. Teachers in this situation perceived that they were not trusted, and not capable of helping others develop or exercising leadership (Nicolaidou, 2010). Hence, a combination of changes to both structure and culture is needed: in addition to initiatives such as decentralization, teacher roles need to be reconceived, from ‘followership’ to ‘leadership’ (Emira, 2010).

Conclusion
The idea of teacher leadership remains powerful: it has a firm theoretical basis in the work of scholars like James Spillane and Alma Harris, and in principle it has the potential to affect instructional change because teachers may be able to influence each other in an empathic and non-threatening way (Margolis & Deuel, 2009). However, while there is optimism in much of the literature about its potential, too little may yet be known about how teacher leadership influences schools (Muijs & Harris, 2006). The literature suggests that introducing teacher leadership needs to be “a carefully orchestrated and deliberate process” that encourages collaboration and involves teacher development and support in order to address a lack of confidence and leadership skills among potential teacher leaders (Muijs & Harris, 2007). With these caveats, the following recommendations can be made to institutional leaders who are considering distributing leadership through their teachers:

• Determine whether institutional and external conditions call for teacher leadership. A failing school that needs to be quickly turned around, for example, may require a more directed, top-down leadership approach, while a school that is seeking to improve its teaching effectiveness may benefit from leadership involvement by teachers.
• Explore whether the principal or other formal leader has the capacity and resources to guide the transition to teacher leadership, and to support teacher leaders in their roles, by addressing challenges such as established role schema and professional norms, and the principal’s own willingness to distribute power in the organization.
• Discover whether there is interest and motivation among teachers for teacher leadership. Find out what potential motivators are available – would teacher leaders gain greater prestige, or more money, for example? – and whether teachers would respond to these motivators by stepping enthusiastically into leadership roles.
• Determine whether the institution can tolerate or accept structural and cultural change, such as re-structured jobs that would give teachers time to lead, decentralized decision-making, and openness to leadership that is stretched over the organization. Educate employees about this alternative way of approaching leadership.

To be sure, this is a daunting list. But having a grasp of the theoretical rationales, and understanding some of the successes and challenges experienced in previous attempts at teacher leadership, puts school leaders in a position to embark on the challenge.




References
Dawson, M. (2011). Becoming a Teacher Leader: teachers re-thinking their roles. Leading and Managing, 17(1), 16-27.
Emira, M. (2010). Leading to Decide or Deciding to Lead? Understanding the Relationship Between Teacher Leadership and Decision Making. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(5), 591 -612. doi:10.1177/1741143210373738
Gardner, J. W. (2007). The Nature of Leadership. Educational Leadership (2nd ed., pp. 17-26). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Harris, A. (2006). Opening Up the “Black Box” of Leadership Practice: Taking a Distributed Leadership Perspective. International Studies in Educational Administration, 34(2), 37-45.
Harris, A., & Muijs, D. (2003). Teacher leadership and school improvement. Education Review, 16(2), 39-42.
Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., & Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 337-347. doi:10.1007/s10833-007-9048-4
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2008). The Leadership Challenge, 4th Edition (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Lovett, S., & Cameron, M. (2011). Career pathways: does remaining close to the classroom matter for early career teachers? A study of practice in New Zealand and the USA. Professional Development in Education, 37, 213-224. doi:10.1080/19415257.2010.531613
Margolis, J., & Deuel, A. (2009). Teacher Leaders in Action: Motivation, Morality, and Money. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(3), 264-286. doi:10.1080/15700760802416115
Maxwell, J. C. (2007). The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership: Follow Them and People Will Follow You (10th ed.). Thomas Nelson.
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the UK. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 961-972. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.010
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2007). Teacher Leadership in (In)action. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 35(1), 111 -134. doi:10.1177/1741143207071387
Nicolaidou, M. (2010). Do primary school teachers in Cypriot schools see themselves as leaders? Echoing practitioners’ voices on levers and barriers. Teacher Development, 14(2), 225-239. doi:10.1080/13664530.2010.494503
Rath, T., & Conchie, B. (2009). Strengths-Based Leadership (1st ed.). Gallup Press.
Roby, D. E. (2011). Teacher Leaders Impacting School Culture. Education, 131(4), 782-790.
Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed Leadership (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Spillane, J. P. (2008). Distributed Leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 143-150.
Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34. doi:10.1080/0022027032000106726
Taylor, Mike, Yates, A., Meyer, L. H., & Kinsella, P. (2011). Teacher professional leadership in support of teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 85-94. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.005
Taylor, Monica, Goeke, J., Klein, E., Onore, C., & Geist, K. (2011). Changing leadership: Teachers lead the way for schools that learn. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 920-929. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.03.003
Weiner, J. M. (2011). Finding Common Ground: Teacher Leaders and Principals Speak Out About Teacher Leadership. Journal of School Leadership, 21, 7-41.