Collective efficacy: explaining school achievement: when teachers believe they can positively affect student achievement, schools may be able to succeed when it had been thought impossible.

If pressed to provide a predictor of academic success, most people would choose socioeconomic status. SES is a strong predictor when we look at averages, but we all know that there are individual students of high wealth who are academic disasters and students of low wealth who are academic marvels. "Is there an accurate predictor of academic success for an individual student?" is the important question.

Research tells us that there may be. Wayne Hoy and colleagues, in numerous studies, have determined that collective efficacy is "more important in explaining school achievement than SES." This is news "of practical significance because it is easier to change the collective efficacy of a school than it is to influence the SES of a school."

What is "collective efficacy?" Hoy defines it as "the perceptions of teachers in a specific school that the faculty as a whole can execute courses of actions required to positively affect student achievement."

Those are fine sounding words, but it would seem as if the chances of teachers believing they can "positively affect student achievement" would be higher at high SES schools than at lower ones. Which could lead one to conclude that SES is still the deciding factor. But it isn't, and the fact that most all of us can point to schools that serve low SES students, yet also have a sense of collective efficacy, illustrates why.

Getting collective efficacy

So, how do you "get" collective efficacy? This is what school leaders need to know. Hoy says that school leaders need to "lead in ways that promote mastery experiences for teachers." And that means, among other things, making sure there are adequate resources and time to develop skills. Professional learning experiences in which teachers practice mastery should be accompanied by opportunities to see it modeled. Which sounds a lot like (because it is) coaching and/or mentoring.

Verbal persuasion is another effective tactic when accompanied by models of success and positive direct experiences. Schools that have learned to adapt and cope with difficulty also contribute to a sense of collective efficacy. And, the leadership that best promotes such coping is one that is "calm in the face of conflict."

Persistence in effort

Hoy summarizes these findings by writing that "the consequences of high collective efficacy will be the acceptance of challenging goals, strong effort by teachers, and persistence in effort to overcome difficulties and succeed."

Hmm, "persistence in effort;" those are words for thought. What are the conditions that nurture "persistence in effort?" The first condition that comes to mind is "stability." That is in short supply these days as accountability sanctions call for changing the curriculum, removing staff and/or reconstitution.

At the same time, a desire to improve can lead folks to keep trying the next "new" thing. Couple that with the fact that an aging work force means that nearly 50 percent of the people currently working as teachers and administrators will be retired within five years, and "stability" seems little more than a dream.

Which makes the concept of "knowledge ecology"--that is, a process for sharing wisdom throughout an organization so that when individuals leave and are replaced there is not a loss of knowledge--a necessity if there is going to be persistence in effort. Fortunately, one of the best systems for practicing knowledge ecology is coaching and mentoring--processes that, not coincidentally, are important for building collective efficacy.

Think of that student you know who defied the "odds" and succeeded when his or her "background" could make you think that impossible. Chances are exceedingly good that somewhere along the line that student developed a sense of personal efficacy--most likely due to the influence of an extraordinary adult in his or her life: a parent, a grandparent, a neighbor, a minister, a counselor, a teacher, maybe even a school administrator.

What's so important about collective efficacy is that when it exists in a school it is much more likely that individual students will develop their own sense of personal efficacy--a state that makes the "odds" irrelevant.

Richard Rothstein, in his thought-provoking book, "Class and Schools," skillfully explains why the actions of schools alone will always be insufficient to truly meet the goal of the No Child Left Behind Act--every child proficient.

At the same time he points out what schools can do. Although he doesn't use the term collective efficacy, it's easy to see how the creation of bonds among students, teachers and administrators that are inevitable when collective efficacy is the goal will permeate the directions it is important for schools to take.

And remember, it is the existence of exactly such a bond that can produce the improbable--the student who succeeds when it was thought impossible, and the school, in concert with a community, that did the same.

George Manthey is a professional learning executive for A CSA.