"Sample Qualitative Study
School Principals’ Infl uence on Trust: Perspectives of Mothers
of Children with Disabilities
Debra L. Shelden
Maureen E. Angell
Julia B. Stoner
Bill D. Roseland
Illinois State University
Abstract
The authors employed a qualitative research design to explore issues of trust in family–professional
relationships. They specifi cally focused on the nature of trust between mothers of children with disabilities and school principals. Analysis of the mothers’ responses to face-to-face interview questions
yielded two primary categories related to their perspectives regarding principals: (a) personal and
professional principal attributes and (b) principal actions within the education system, with students,
and with students’ families. Subcategories were developed that further delineated the relationships
participants had with the principals of their children’s educational programs. The authors address
implications for school leadership and the establishment of trustworthy family–professional relationships, especially as they impact the lives of students and families in need of special education support.
Key words: parents of children with disabilities, school principals, trust
Parents are meant to be included as fundamental participants in educational organizations. Decades of research have supported the role of parent involvement in positive educational outcomes
for students ( Colarusso & O’Rourke, 2007 ; Freiberg, 2006 ). Recent legal mandates require school
systems to engage parents in meaningful ways. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB; 2002)
calls for school systems to facilitate parent involvement ( Keller, 2006 ) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA; 2004) mandates parental involvement in all aspects
of assessment and service delivery for students who receive special education support ( Fletcher,
Coulter, Reschly, & Vaughn, 2004 ). In light of these legal mandates and underlying fundamental
principles of family–school relationships, trust between parents and educational professionals has
emerged as a critical factor ( Bryk & Schneider, 2003 ; Dunst, Johanson, Rounds, Trivette, & Hamby,
1992). Trust may infl uence student achievement because of its role in establishing and maintaining
collaborative relationships between home and school, and trust may shape parents’ attitudes toward
educational systems and infl uence their engagement in their children’s educational programs (Dunst
et al.; Tschannen-Moran, 2004 ). Bryk and Schneider found that was not only trust associated with
greater gains in student achievement, but also with longer lasting gains in achievement.
Consequently, not only is trust between parents and education professionals necessary for effective
partnerships stipulated by legal mandates, but also, and more importantly, it appears to have a positive
effect on student outcomes, and it is the students themselves who are the true benefi ciaries of trusting
relationships between parents and education professionals. However, if trust is valuable to parents,
teachers, and students, it is incumbent on school principals to foster it, maintain it, and exemplify
trusting relationships with all parents, including parents of children with disabilities. Indeed, trust is
“increasingly recognized as a critical element of leadership” ( Tschannen-Moran, 2003 , p. 162) and the
leadership of schools, the principals, must understand their vital role in establishing trust.
Many defi nitions of trust exist in the literature. In their review of literature on trust, Hoy and
Tschannen-Moran (1999)found 16 defi nitions of trust. They identifi ed fi ve facets of trust refl ected
in those defi nitions, including benevolence, reliability, competence, honesty, and openness. Based
on those facets of trust, Hoy and Tschannen-Moran proposed that trust is “an individual’s or
Copyright of Journal of Educational Research is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd. and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or e-mail articles for individual use.
Address correspondence to Debra L. Shelden, Illinois State University, Department of Special Education, Campus
Box 5910, Normal, IL 61790-5910. (E-mail: <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED_EMAIL_ADDRESS>)
Qualitative
Characteristics
in Marginal
Annotations
(01)
(02)
(03)
CHAPTER 1 The Process of Conducting Research Using Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches 43
group’s willingness to be vulnerable to another party based on the confi dence that the latter party
is benevolent, reliable, competent, honest, and open” (p. 189). In this defi nition, they established
vulnerability as a precursor to the need for trust. The need for trust rests on the recognition of the
potential for betrayal or harm from another person. When that risk does not exist, we have no
need to trust ( Tschannen-Moran, 2004 ). The latter part of the defi nition identifi es fi ve facets, or
dimensions, that infl uence the extent of trust. This defi nition served as a conceptual foundation for
the present report of a study of the perspectives of mothers of children with disabilities on the role
of school principals in facilitating or inhibiting the establishment and maintenance of trust between
parents of children with disabilities and education professionals. Hoy and Tschannen-Moran’s facets of trusts, particularly benevolence, openness, and competence, were refl ected in the principal
attributes and actions that emerged from the present study as facilitators of trust.
Trust and School Leaders
On a systems level, trust is identifi ed as a critical factor in school reform ( Bryk & Schneider,
2003). School leaders can infl uence the nature of trust within educational systems ( Kochanek,
2005; Tschannen-Moran, 2004 ). The signifi cance of teachers’ and parents’ trust in school principals is strong and can infl uence trust among other constituents ( Hoy & Tschannen-Moran, 1999 ).
Among school leaders, principals in particular can infl uence the overall school climate and thereby
infl uence trust ( DiPaola & Walther-Thomas, 2003 ; Hoy, Smith, & Sweetland, 2002 ; Soodak & Erwin,
2000). Collegial leadership, or the openness of the leadership behavior of the principal, is a predictor of school climate, which in turn also infl uences overall trust (Hoy et al.).
As leaders who set the tone in schools, principals are responsible for building and maintaining
trusting relationships ( Whitener, Brodt, Korsgaard, & Werner, 1998 ). To demonstrate how principals might fulfi ll this responsibility, Tschannen-Moran (2004)offered a three-dimensional Trustworthy Leadership Matrix (p. 176). She emphasized the usefulness of considering not only fi ve
facets of trust (i.e., benevolence, honesty, openness, reliability, and competence) in relation to
fi ve constituencies of schools (i.e., administrators, teachers, students, parents, and the public), but
also fi ve functions of school leadership in understanding how school principals’ behavior can signifi cantly infl uence school climate and culture. These functions of leadership, as applied to trust,
include (a) developing a vision of a trustworthy school, (b) serving as a role model for trustworthiness through language and action, (c) facilitating teacher competence through effective coaching,
(d) improving school discipline among students and teachers through effective management, and
(e) mediating confl ict and repair in a constructive and honest manner. Administrator trustworthiness, then, is demonstrated by nurturing and balancing relationships among facets of trust, constituencies of schools, and the functions of leadership.
Bryk and Schneider (2003)discussed the demonstration of respect as one critical facet of the
trust defi nition for school principals. They claimed that respect is closely related to other facets of
trust, particularly openness, benevolence, and reliability. Bryk and Schneider defi ned respect as
part of the social discourse within school communities. When educators in a school system demonstrate respect in their social exchanges, they contribute to the development of trust. Principals
serve as models of these social exchanges for other school personnel ( Kochanek, 2005 ). Openness,
as a part of the trust defi nition, refers to the perception of one party that another party is forthcoming with relevant information and one party’s confi dence that another party does not withhold
relevant information ( Butler & Cantrell, 1984 ; Mishra, 1996 ). This openness signals a kind of reciprocal trust ( Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000 ). Benevolence, as demonstrated by caring and support,
also infl uences reciprocal trust (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy) and is valued by principals’ constituents
(Bryk & Schneider; Tschannen-Moran, 2004 ). Finally, reliability is demonstrated not only through
predictability but also through commitment and dedication. These facets of trust are principal characteristics valued by parents. As Bryk and Schneider noted, “Almost every parent and teacher we
spoke with at this school commented effusively about the principal’s personal style, his openness
to others, and his willingness to reach out to parents, teachers, and students” (p. 42).
Although the research cited above applies to all relationships of trust within a school, there is
a growing body of research that has focused on these issues as related to parents of children with
disabilities. Parents of children with disabilities may have increased interaction with educational
administrators simply by the nature of special education delivery. Administrators and parents of
children with disabilities are part of an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team. Parents and administrators are integral to team decisions and, through stipulations in the IDEIA, parents are to
be considered equal and active team members. Beyond the legal requirements of parental involvement with children with disabilities, recent research has investigated parent perspectives regarding
various aspects of interactions with education professionals (Angell, Bailey, & Stoner, 2008; Bailey,
Parette, Stoner, Angell, & Carroll, 2006 ; Stoner & Angell, 2006 ; Stoner, Angell, House, & Bock, 2007 ;
Stoner et al., 2005 ). This research has revealed that trust is a major factor in the complex relationship between parents of children with disabilities and education professionals ( Lake & Billingsley,
2000; Stoner & Angell; Stoner et al., 2005 ).
Parents of children with disabilities also have the right to implement due process proceedings
if they disagree with the decisions of the IEP team (IDEIA, 2004). Due process safeguards “afford
parents a basic right of protest when they disagree with the educational decisions and actions
of the school district” ( Fiedler, Simpson, & Clark, 2007 , p. 207). These due process safeguards
provide for increased opportunities between parents and educational administrators and hence
provide additional opportunities for trust to be infl uenced. If due process is lengthy and involves
hiring attorneys, it can be quite costly to the school district and parents. The IDEIA encourages
but does not require mediation prior to the implementation of due process. Lake and Billingsley
(2000) investigated perspectives of parents and education professionals involved in due process
cases. Nearly 90% of their parent participants reported the initiation or escalation of confl ict as a
result of discrepant perceptions between parents and other team members’ differing perceptions
of children’s needs. In their study, parents reported dissatisfaction with school teams who did
not recognize children’s individuality (i.e., did not recognize individual strengths and limitations
separate from a disability label). In addition, parents felt as though schools operated from a defi cit
perspective, placing too much emphasis on what children cannot do as opposed to focusing on or
recognizing the strengths of each child ( Aigne, Colvin, & Baker, 1998 ; Lake & Billingsley). It should
be noted that the discrepant perspectives between parents and education professionals developed
over time as parents perceived negative interactions with school teams.
In addition, when parents and educational teams operate from discrepant viewpoints with
regard to assessment and service delivery, parents are more likely to distrust future exchanges
when their expectations are not met ( Stoner & Angell, 2006 ). Principals can infl uence the impact
of these discrepant viewpoints through their infl uence on school climate. Tschannen-Moran (2004)
described the relationship among principals, overall school trust and climate, and parents’ trust:
Principals play an important role in creating the context for trust to develop between parents and the school
and between teachers and parents. The school leader creates the framework and structure for these relationships and, by example, may set the tone for these interactions as well. (p. 136)
More specifi cally, principals’ interactions with individual students and families can infl uence the
overall child-centeredness of schools ( DiPaola & Walther-Thomas, 2003 ; Kochanek, 2005 ; Soodak &
Erwin, 2000 ).
Establishing and maintaining trust does not ensure that school districts never face a due process
hearing; however, a trusting relationship has the potential to minimize confl ict and lead to resolution. Consequently, principals have a major responsibility to positively contribute to the establishment of trust with all parents, including parents of children with disabilities, who may be
interacting with great frequency with education professionals, including teachers, related service
personnel, and principals.
Purpose of the Study
The role of the principal in establishing or infl uencing overall organizational trust in schools has
emerged from extant research (e.g., Hoy et al., 2002 ; Hoy & Tschannen-Moran, 1999 ). More recent
research has addressed characteristics and actions that can be taken by principals to improve
organizational trust (e.g., Kochanek, 2005 ). The importance of trust in establishing effective home–
school partnerships for students with disabilities is also strongly supported in recent research
(Lake & Billingsley, 2000 ; Stoner & Angell, 2006 ; Stoner et al., 2005 ; Turnbull, Turnbull, Erwin, &
Soodak, 2006 ). Given the critical role principals can assume in establishing trust, further research
is needed on how they infl uence levels of trust in relationships between families of children with
disabilities and education professionals.
Problem is
exploratory
(08)
(09)
(10)
(11)
(12)
CHAPTER 1 The Process of Conducting Research Using Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches 45
The present study emerged from a broader study of the perspectives of mothers of children
with disabilities on trust in education personnel ( Angell, Stoner, & Shelden, 2009 ). Although we did
not inquire specifi cally about the role of administrators, the strong infl uence of administrators, particularly school principals, was apparent during interviews with 16 mothers of children of varying
disabilities, ages, and geographical settings. We then re-examined our data to address the following
research question:
What are the perspectives of mothers of children with disabilities on trust in school principals?
Method
Research Design
We employed a qualitative research methodology to gain insight into the nature of trust of mothers of children with disabilities in school principals. We viewed trust as the central phenomenon
requiring exploration and understanding ( Creswell, 2002 ). Considering the nature of our target
phenomenon (i.e., trust), we followed the advice of Strauss and Corbin (1998)who explained that
“qualitative methods can be used to obtain the intricate details about phenomena such as feelings,
thought processes, and emotions that are diffi cult to extract or learn about through more conventional methods” (p. 11).
The method used for the present study was the collective case study as described by Stake
(2000). Collective case study involves the study of more than one case in order to “investigate a
phenomenon, population, or general condition” (p. 437). This approach assumes that investigating a number of cases leads to better comprehension and better theorizing ( Brantlinger, Jimenez,
Klingner, Pugach, & Richardson, 2005 ). Miles and Huberman (1994)contended that studying multiple cases gives the researcher reassurance that the events in only one case are not “wholly idiosyncratic” (p. 172). Further, studying multiple cases allowed us to see processes and outcomes
across all cases and enabled a deeper understanding through more powerful descriptions and
explanations.
Participants
We used a purposive sampling technique that included snowballing methods to recruit a heterogeneous group of mothers of school-aged children with disabilities as participants in this study, basing the rationale for our maternal focus on research indicating that mothers have more contact with
education professionals than do fathers (e.g., David, 1998 ; Nord, Brimhall, & West, 1997 ; Nord &
West, 2001 ; Thomson, McLanahan, & Curtin, 1992 ). We purposefully included a range of mothers who had children with various disabilities across various grade levels in schools from several
school districts that represented a range of settings (e.g., rural, suburban, urban). We expected this
sampling methodology to afford us maximum opportunities for comparable analysis ( Strauss &
Corbin, 1998 ) of mothers from a variety of backgrounds and experiences with schools, as well as
having children with a variety of disabilities and at various ages.
Participants were recruited using three techniques: (a) district-level administrators’ distribution
of recruitment materials; (b) individual school personnel’s distribution of recruitment materials; and
(c) a participant referral snowballing technique, whereby participants distributed recruitment materials to other mothers who might express different perspectives or had had different experiences
with education professionals. This sampling method facilitated our attaining as much variation as
possible within our sample ( Patton, 1980 ). In our initial recruitment phase, after obtaining university approval to conduct the research, we mailed explanatory and invitational letters to several
school district administrators in a Midwestern state, asking them to distribute the letters to potential
participants if they approved of our interviewing mothers with children in their schools. In the invitational letters, mothers were asked to return permission-to-contact forms if they were interested
in participating in the study. Although it was designed to protect potential participants’ identities
until they agreed to meet with us for interviews, this method of recruitment proved to be minimally effective, yielding only 2 participants. We tentatively attributed administrators’ or mothers’
reluctance to participate to the nature of the study (i.e., the investigation of trust) and consequently
asked school principals and various school personnel (e.g., therapists and special education teachers) to assist us in recruiting participants.
Purpose and
question focuses
on participants’
experiences
Literature plays
a minor role in
shaping question
The researcher is
refl exive
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
46 PART I An Introduction to Educational Research
During the second phase of recruitment, school personnel sent permission-to-contact forms
to potential participants with whom they had regular contact. On receipt of this approval, we
scheduled one-on-one, face-to-face interviews with the mothers, explained the study, and obtained
informed consent. We tentatively attributed the success of this recruitment method to the nature of
the relationships participants had with the education professionals who contacted them or to the
personal contact. Personal contact from familiar individuals within their schools or districts may
have infl uenced the mothers’ willingness to participate.
Our second and third recruitment phases yielded an additional 14 participants. Our fi nal participant pool consisted of 16 mothers of children with various disabilities. They ranged in age from 18
to 55 years. In all, 12 mothers were Caucasian, I was African American, and 3 were Hispanic. One
of the Hispanic mothers had limited English profi ciency, so a Spanish-speaking interpreter assisted
during her interview. Most of the mothers were from urban and suburban areas and 2 were from
rural areas. These mothers and their children represented eight school districts, varying grade levels, and a range of geographical areas (i.e., rural, suburban, and urban)." what is the purpose of the research