Organizational Policies and Programs to Reduce Job Stress and Risk of Workplace Violence Among K-12 Education Staff

We examine strategies, programs, and policies that educators have developed to reduce work stressors and thus health risks. First, we review twenty-seven empirical studies and review papers on organizational programs and policies in K-12 education published from 1990 to 2015 and find some evidence that mentoring, induction, and Peer Assistance and Review programs can increase support, skill development, decision-making authority, and perhaps job security, for teachers—and thus have the potential to reduce job stressors. Second, we describe efforts to reduce workplace violence in Oregon, especially in special education, including legislation, collective bargaining, research, and public awareness. We conclude that to reduce workplace violence, adequate resources are needed for staffing, training, equipment, injury/assault reporting, and investigation. Third, we discuss collective bargaining initiatives that led to mentoring and Peer Assistance and Review and state legislation on prevention of bullying and harassment of school staff. Finally, we present a research agenda on these issues.

Distributed Accountability: Creating District Systems to Ensure Teaching Quality

Districts play a key and relatively unexamined role in distributed leadership research. This article explores how leadership was distributed through a district structure designed to improve the quality of teaching by improving the quality of teacher evaluation. It examines peer assistance and review, a policy designed to address the key problems of traditional teacher evaluation by allowing administrators and teacher leaders to share accountability for evaluation processes and decisions. The article presents data from a peer assistance and review program in one urban district, detailing how the program distributed accountability for teacher quality across the district organization. The article extends previous work on distributed leadership by showing how the design of shared tasks can effectively distribute accountability. The article also extends previous work on distributed leadership by elucidating the democratic effects of that distribution. As such, the article addresses questions of instrumentality (i.e., how can district leaders design and implement a better teacher evaluation system?) and agency (i.e., what are the political implications of distributing formal authority for teacher evaluation out of the hands of administrators and into the hands of teachers?).

Making Sense of Distributed Leadership: The Case of Peer Assistance and Review

This article explores a case of shifting leadership responsibility for teacher evaluation. Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) formally involves teachers in the summative evaluation of other teachers—although the boundaries of the involvement are often vague. Since teacher evaluation has traditionally been the domain of school principals, involving teachers in teacher evaluation raises questions about how those faced with the new role make sense of it and enact it. The article draws on theories of professions, organizations, and institutions to examine the implementation of PAR in one large urban school district. Findings suggest that, despite positive sentiments about the policy across stakeholder groups, those involved wanted principals to remain a central figure in the evaluation of teachers in PAR. Education’s hierarchical norms, the difficulty of conducting evaluations, district leadership, and program ambiguity are identified as challenges to distributing leadership.

Making Sense of Distributed Leadership: The Case of Peer Assistance and Review

This article explores a case of shifting leadership responsibility for teacher evaluation. Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) formally involves teachers in the summative evaluation of other teachers—although the boundaries of the involvement are often vague. Since teacher evaluation has traditionally been the domain of school principals, involving teachers in teacher evaluation raises questions about how those faced with the new role make sense of it and enact it. The article draws on theories of professions, organizations, and institutions to examine the implementation of PAR in one large urban school district. Findings suggest that, despite positive sentiments about the policy across stakeholder groups, those involved wanted principals to remain a central figure in the evaluation of teachers in PAR. Education's hierarchical norms, the difficulty of conducting evaluations, district leadership, and program ambiguity are identified as challenges to distributing leadership.