Academic Optimism:
Decades of Research in a Quest for
School Characteristics that Make a Difference for
the Achievement of All Students
Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2006). Academic optimism of schools:
A force for student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 425-446.
Hoy, W. K. (2012). School characteristics that make a difference for the achievement of
all students: A 40-year academic odyssey. Journal of Educational Administration., 50,
76-97.
Seton Hall, April 13, 2013
www.waynekhoy.com
© Hoy, 2013
The Journey Begins
Oklahoma State (1965)
As a new professor needing to do research, I had an interest in school climate.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Each school has it own distinct feel, aura, identity, character,
atmosphere, climate.
Individuals have personalities—so do schools—climate.
How does one conceptualize the climate of a school.
Initially, we decided on climates along a two continua:
from custodial to humanistic
from closed to open.
Where open school climates related to humanistic ones?
© Hoy, 2013
School Climates:
Open Climates and Humanistic Climates
• The rigidly traditional school serves as a model for the custodial orientation.
This kind of organization provides a highly controlled setting concerned
primarily with the maintenance of order. Watchful mistrust and autocratic
control are the critical aspects of a custodial perspective.
• The model for the humanistic orientation is the school conceived of as an
educational community in which members learn through interaction and
experience. The humanistic teacher is optimistic about the student and has
open and friendly relations with students. Teachers and students are willing to
act on their own volition and accept responsibility for their actions.
• The Open School Climate is one anchored in authentic, open, and transparent
interactions among faculty members, supportive supervision, & high morale.
• The Closed School Climate is one imbued with game playing, close teacher
supervision, teacher apathy, and low morale
© Hoy, 2013
Oklahoma Findings
Humanistic Schools (contrasted with Custodial ones) had principals who were:
–
–
–
–
–
Considerate
Personal
Engaging
Friendly
Supportive—avoided close supervision
1.
Moreover, humanistic schools had faculties with higher morale and the faculty was more
engaged.
2.
The more open the climate, the more humanistic the control perspectives—two go
together. The relation is a reciprocal one.
1.
There was openness and authenticity in teacher-principal relations and openness in
teacher-teacher relations in humanistic schools.
Three years in Oklahoma and then back to east coast, Rutgers in NJ
© Hoy, 2013
Rutgers Studies
(1968)
More studies on the Climate of Schools in New Jersey.
What kind of consequences did open climates and humanistic climates have on schools?
Series of studies done in New Jersey to answer these questions was performed, looking at the
impact of climate (openness and humanism) on students rather than faculty.
Two student concepts came to mind: alienation and self-actualization.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Custodialism and openness were both related to student alienation in NJ high schools.
In general, the more open the school climate, the less alienated were the students.
Open schools were antidotes for student sense of powerlessness and normlessness.
Students suffered less from a sense of powerlessness, normlessness, and selfestrangement or isolation.
Not surprisingly, custodial climates had alienated students along same dimensions.
Humanism of school climate related to student level of self-actualization.
Feeling good about the results of our work on climate—direction clear.
But graduate students and administrators want to know if climate was related to student
achievement.
We started to look in each sample of schools, but to no avail.
© Hoy, 2013
Organizational Climate of Schools
Dimensions of Principal’s Behavior
Supportive—reflects a concern for teachers, is open to suggestions, respects teachers’ professional competence. Praise is
genuine and frequent and criticism is constructive.
 The principal uses constructive criticism.
Directive—maintains close and constant control over all teacher and school activities.
 The principal monitors everything teachers do.
Restrictive—Hinders rather than facilitates teacher work; burdens with busywork.
• Routine duties interfere with the job of teaching.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimensions of Teacher Behavior
Collegial—supports open and professional interactions among teachers. Teachers are enthusiastic, accepting, and mutually
respectful of professional competence.
 Teachers respect the professional competence of their colleagues.
Intimate—reflects a cohesive and strong network of socials support among the faculty. Teachers know each other well, are close
personal friends, and socialize.
• Teachers socialize with each other.
Disengaged—refers to a lack of meaning and focus in professional activities. Teachers are simply putting in time and going
through the motions.
• Faculty meetings are useless.
© Hoy, 2013
Organizational Climate of Schools
Supportive
Directive
Restrictive
Openness of Principal
Behavior
Collegial
Intimate
Disengaged
Openness of Teacher
Behavior
© Hoy, 2013
Types of Organizational Climate
Principal Behavior
Open
Teacher
Behavior
Open
Closed
© Hoy, 2013
Closed
Types of Organizational Climate
Principal Behavior
Open
Teacher
Behavior
Closed
Open
Climate
Open
Closed
Closed
Climate
© Hoy, 2013
Types of Organizational Climate
Principal Behavior
Open
Teacher
Behavior
Open
Climate
Open
Closed
Disengaged
Climate
© Hoy, 2013
Closed
Engaged
Climate
Closed
Climate
Climate Studies Summary
1.
2.
School Climate does capture the feel of the school.
Openness and humanism have many positive effects on
students—less alienated, more committed, greater
confidence, and higher self actualization.
3.
But neither the openness of the climate nor the humanism
of teachers is related to academic performance of students.
4.
School climate was related to affective student outcomes,
but not related to academic outcomes.
5.
Why?
© Hoy, 2013
Rutgers Climate Studies
1.
Every climate study we did at RU, where we could, we checked its influence on academic
performance, but with SES included as a control, there was no relation.
2.
We actually did another seven or eight studies to do avail—climate not related to
achievement.
3.
James Coleman’s classic national study of American Public Schools was also discouraging
because he found: “Only a small part of (student achievement) is the result of school
factors, in contrast to family background differences between communities.”
4.
SES overwhelmed when it comes to achievement.
5.
Together with my own research and Coleman’s findings, I came to believe that
organization had little to do with school achievement; achievement primarily in the hands
of teachers in the classroom.
6.
Thus, I turned my attention to research to different areas.
© Hoy, 2013
Detour: New Research Directions
1.
Bureaucratic structure was directly related to teacher alienation.
2.
Bureaucratic structure was negatively related to innovation and change.
3.
Bureaucratic socialization of new teachers—more bureaucratic and custodial.
4.
Key principal behaviors to develop loyal teachers:
1) Consideration
2) Initiating structure
3) Leading by example
4) Emotional detachment
5) Hierarchical independence.
6) Authenticity
5. Patterns of Administrative Succession for Principals.
Outsiders
versus
Insiders
Change
Status Quo
Higher Satisfaction
Lower Satisfaction
More Influence
Less Influence
More Emotional Detachment
Less Emotional Detachment
High Faculty Morale
Lower Faculty Morale
© Hoy, 2013
Return to the Quest
1.
School Climate does capture the feel of the school.
2.
Openness and humanism have many positive effects on students—less alienated, more
committed, greater confidence, and higher self actualization.
3.
But neither the openness of the climate nor the humanism of the school was related to
academic performance of students.
4.
School climate was related to affective student outcomes, but not related to academic
outcomes.
5. Ron Edmonds’s Challenge to Coleman: Case Studies of Urban School.
6. Edmonds found and argued that high achievement was a function of:
–
–
–
–
–
Strong Principals
High Expectations for Students
Emphasis on Basic Skills
Orderly environments
Frequent, systematic evaluations
One or two cases don’t really prove much—Could the findings be generalized?
Another look at School Climate: A New Perspective—Organizational Health
© Hoy, 2013
Organizational Health
Organizational Health Inventory (OHI)
Institutional (Community) Level—Interactions with the community
• Institutional Integrity
Managerial Level—Interactions with the principal
• Principal Influence
• Consideration
• Initiating Structure
• Resource Support
School Level—Interactions with colleagues and students
• Morale
•Academic Emphasis
Index of the health of school climate is a function of all these elements.
But health was not related to achievement controlling for SES.
Multiple Regression—use individual tests rather than index.
© Hoy, 2013
Organizational Health
A Healthy School Climate is characterized by institutional integrity--teachers are
protected from disruptive outside forces. The principal has influence with superiors,
gets needed resources, and has a integrated leadership style that is concern with
both the task at hand and the social well being of teachers. Morale is high and there
is a general press for academic achievement by teachers, parents, and students.
A Unhealthy School Climate is vulnerable to disruptive outside forces. The principal has
little influence with superiors, resources are scarce, and the principal neither sets
direction nor is supports teachers. Morale is poor and there is limited attention to
academic matters because the teacher have given up.
Our index of school health was not related to student achievement, but…
However, only Academic Emphasis was consistently related to student achievement,
controlling for SES.
First school property related to Student Achievement, controlling for SES (1990s).
Two decades to find one school property that facilitates student achievement for all.
True for elementary, middle, and high schools (measures for all levels).
www.waynekhoy.com
© Hoy, 2013
Trust: The First Generation of Studies--Rutgers
Bill KupersmithTRUST: A generalized sense held by the work group that the word or promise
of another could be relied upon (Rotter)
Measures: Faculty Trust:
In Colleagues
In Principal
In District
Trust related to many important attributes:
Authentic leadership of the principal
Morale of faculty
Openness of climate
Health of school
Subjective measure of effectiveness
BUT NOT to ACHIEVEMENT, controlling for SES.
About this time, it was on to Ohio State. Thus, far only one school variable has been
identified that predicts academic achievement controlling for SES.
© Hoy, 2013
Trust: The Second Generation—Ohio State
a more refined definition of trust
Megan Tschannen-Moran-
TRUST: Trust is a state in which individuals and groups are willing to make
themselves vulnerable to others and take risks with confidence that others will
respond to their actions in positive ways, with benevolence, predictability,
competence, honesty, and openness.
Faculty Trust in:
In Colleagues
In Principal
New Dimensions
In Students
In Parents
Surprise!!!
Faculty Trust in Students and Parents is one thing, not two. [Univ. of Chicago]
Faculty Trust in Students and Parents was related to Student Achievement
controlling for SES.
Relationship is true regardless of school level (elementary, middle, high school).
Also true in other countries—for example, China, Taiwan.
Second organizational property to make a difference in achievement (1998).
© Hoy, 2013
Collective Efficacy—Ohio State
Roger Goddard-A Study of Collective Efficacy of elementary schools.
Grew out of the work of Albert Bandura, who claimed efficacy could be framed as a
collective as well as an individual construct; in fact, he maintained that
collective efficacy was more important than SES in predicting student
achievement.
COLLECTVE EFFICACY: teachers as a whole (as a collective) have a sense that
they can organize and execute decisions and influence the activities that have
positive effects on students.
Developed a reliable and valid measure of the collective efficacy of a school.
Collective Efficacy was the third property of schools that predicted student achievement
controlling for SES and other demographic characteristics of schools
Relationship is true regardless of school level (elementary, middle, high school).
Also true in other countries.
Academic Emphasis, Trust in Clients, and Collective Efficacy were the three
characteristics that make a difference in schools beyond SES.
What about the three properties working together?
Three properties added together should explain more variance in achievement-But!
HOW TO RESOLVE THIS PROBLEM?© Walk
the beaches of Naples, Florida.
Hoy, 2013
Academic Optimism: A New Construct
The elements of academic optimism and
their reciprocal relation to each other.
Academic
Emphasis
Collective
Efficacy
Faculty
Trust
Academic Optimism is the uniting of these three concepts into an integrated whole.
Efficacy is the belief faculty can make a positive contribution to student learning:
teachers believe in themselves.
Trust is the belief that students, parents, teachers can cooperate to improve student learning:
teachers believe in their students.
Academic Emphasis is the academic enactment of these beliefs:
teachers act to improve academic success of students.
Academic Optimism is the collective belief that that:
The faculty can make a difference--cognitive facet.
Students can learn--affective and emotional side.
Hoy, 2013
Academic performance can be ©
achieved--behavioral
enacted.
Academic Optimism and School Achievement: A Theoretical Model
Urbanicity
Socioeconomic
Status
Mathematics
Faculty Trust in
Students and Parents
Collective Efficacy
Academic Emphasis
Academic Optimism
Student
Achievement
Science
Priori Student
Achievement
Mathematics
Science
© Hoy, 2013
Sample and Method
Sample = 96 high schools in Ohio
Contacted 149 schools and got 96 (65%)
Fairly representative sample of Ohio High School in terms of
SES and balance of urban, suburban, and rural.
Data were collected in faculty meetings and also from the Ohio
Department of Education (Achievement DATA)
SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) was used to test the model.
© Hoy, 2013
A Test of the Academic Optimism and Student Achievement Model
(Hoy, Tarter, Hoy, 2007)
Mathematics
Faculty Trust in
Students & Parents
Collective Efficacy
Academic Emphasis
1.00
.75
.99
Academic Optimism
Student
Achievement
.90
.92
Science
© Hoy, 2013
Academic Optimism and School Achievement: A Theoretical Model
Urbanicity
Socioeconomic
Status
Mathematics
Faculty Trust in
Students and Parents
Collective Efficacy
Academic Emphasis
Academic Optimism
Student
Achievement
Science
Priori Student
Achievement
Mathematics
Science
© Hoy, 2013
A Test of the Academic Optimism and Student Achievement Model
(Hoy, Tarter, Woolfolk Hoy, 2006)
Urbanicity
Socioeconomic
Status
.02
.20
Mathematics
.19
Faculty Trust in
Students & Parents
Collective Efficacy
Academic Emphasis
1.00
.75
.99
Academic Optimism
.21
Student
Achievement
.90
.92
.60
Science
Priori Student
Achievement
.97
Mathematics
.96
R2=.67**
Science
© Hoy, 2013
A Second Test of the Academic Optimism and Student Achievement
(Hoy, Tarter, Woolfolk Hoy, 2007)
Urbanicity
Socioeconomic
Status
-.18
.23
Faculty Trust in
Students & Parents
Collective Efficacy
.23
.74
.99
Academic Optimism
.93
.27
Student
Achievement
.93
Academic Emphasis
.44
Reading
.98
Writing
.78
Social Studies
Priori Student
Achievement
.99
Reading
.96
.89
Writing
Social Studies
© Hoy, 2013
R2=.54**
Conclusions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
There is strong evidence that academic optimism is a latent construct
consisting of academic optimism, collective trust in parents and students, and
collective efficacy.
Academic optimism is directly related to school achievement even after
controlling for SES and earlier achievement.
Academic optimism is as strong predictor of achievement as SES; academic
optimism can be developed, but SES cannot.
Optimism in academic matters is a strong force for achievement.
Trust in parents and students seems to liberate teachers to innovate in the
classroom without fear of retribution from parents.
Collective efficacy signals a can do attitude of faculty and enables teachers to
set and pursue challenging goals with students.
Academic emphasis focuses behavior on academic matters and mobilizes to
teachers to action.
© Hoy, 2013
Conclusions from Other Studies
1.
Academic Optimism is related to academic achievement
regardless of school level.
2. Academic Optimism is related to academic achievement in
other counties and cultures.
3. How can administrators cultivate a culture of academic
optimism?
Develop trust, collective efficacy, & academic emphasis
Cooperative relations with parents--trust
Experience, Models, Persuasion—collective efficacy
Academic emphasis—celebrate academic
achievement
But not at the expense of other elements.
© Hoy, 2013
Principals Creating A Culture of Academic Optimism and Student
Achievement :A Path Model (McGuigan & Hoy, 2006)
Faculty Trust in
Students and Parents
Collective Efficacy
Enabling Structure
Academic Optimism
Socioeconomic
Status
© Hoy, 2013
Academic Emphasis
Student Achievement
A Test of Enabling Structure, Academic Optimism, Achievement Model
(McGuigan & Hoy, 2006)
Faculty Trust in
Students and Parents
Collective Efficacy
.98
Enabling Structure
.96
.37**
Academic Optimism
Academic Emphasis
.95
.54**(Math)
Student Achievement
.21 (Math)
Socioeconomic
Status
Math R2=.48**
© Hoy, 2013
Why Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
Bryk & Schneider (20Study
of Trust in Chicago
School Conditions that Promote Learning and Achievement
1. Teachers’ “can do” Attitude and Internalized Responsibility
2. Outreach to Parents
3. Professional Community--Collaborative Work Practices and
Commitment to Improve Teaching and Learning.
4. High Expectations and High Academic Standards
© Hoy, 2013
Why Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
School Conditions that Promote Achievement
Bryk & Schneider (2002)
Study of Trust
Hoy, Tarter, & Woolfolk Hoy (2006)
Study of Academic Optimism
1. Teachers’ “can do” Attitude and
Internalized Responsibility
Collective Efficacy
© Hoy, 2013
Why Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
School Conditions that Promote Achievement
Bryk & Schneider (2002)
Study of Trust
Hoy, Tarter, & Woolfolk Hoy (2006)
Study of Academic Optimism
1. Teachers’ “can do” Attitude and
Internalized Responsibility
Collective Efficacy
2. Outreach to Parents
Faculty Trust in
Parents and
Teachers
© Hoy, 2013
Why Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
School Conditions that Promote Achievement
Bryk & Schneider (2002)
Study of Trust
Hoy, Tarter, & Woolfolk Hoy (2006)
Study of Academic Optimism
1. Teachers’ “can do” Attitude and
Internalized Responsibility
Collective Efficacy
2. Outreach to Parents
3. Professional Community
Collaborative Work Practices and
Commitment to Improve Teaching
Faculty Trust in
Parents and
Teachers
© Hoy, 2013
Why Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
School Conditions that Promote Achievement
Bryk & Schneider (2002)
Study of Trust
Hoy, Tarter, & Woolfolk Hoy (2006)
Study of Academic Optimism
1. Teachers’ “can do” Attitude and
Internalized Responsibility
Collective Efficacy
2. Outreach to Parents
3. Professional Community
Collaborative Work Practices and
Commitment to Improve Teaching
Faculty Trust in
Parents and
Teachers
4. High Expectations and
High Academic Standards
Academic Emphasis
© Hoy, 2013
Why Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
School Conditions that Promote Achievement
Bryk & Schneider (2002)
Study of Trust
Hoy, Tarter, & Woolfolk Hoy (2006)
Study of Academic Optimism
1. Teachers’ “can do” Attitude and
Internalized Responsibility
Collective Efficacy
2. Outreach to Parents
3. Professional Community
Collaborative Work Practices and
Commitment to Improve Teaching
Faculty Trust in
Parents and
Teachers
4. High Expectations and
High Academic Standards
Academic Emphasis
© Hoy, 2013
A
C
A
D
E
M
I
C
O
P
T
I
M
I
S
M
How Does Academic Optimism Lead to Higher Student Achievement?
Feedback
GOAL THEORY
•
•
•
•
Collective
Efficacy
Academic
Emphasis
Culture of
Academic
Optimism
Challenging Goals
Effort
Persistence
Resilience
Motivation
•
•
•
•
Responsibility
Effort
Persistence
Resilience
Student
Achievement
Trust in
Parents &
Students
COOPERATION
• Students
• Teachers
• Parents
Relational
Trust
Feedback
Dynamics of School Properties to Promote Student Achievement
© Hoy, 2013
RESEARCH AGENDA FOR ACADEMIC OPTIMISM
A. School-Level Questions: Antecedent and Consequences
1. What are the characteristics that produce School Academic Optimism? [ANTECEDENTS]
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Leadership of the Principal?
The Structure of the School?
The Professionalism of Teachers?
Professional Learning Community?
Open Organizational Climate?
A Climate of Humanism?
Mindfulness of the Principal?
Self-efficacy of the Principal?
Participatory Decision Making?
2. What are the consequences of a Culture of Academic Optimism? [CONSEQUENCES]
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Higher level of School Effectiveness?
Lower Drop-out Rate?
Lower level of Teacher Absenteeism?
Higher levels of Student Engagement?
High level of Student Self-Efficacy?
Higher level of Student Motivation?
Higher level of Organizational Citizenship?
Higher level of Teacher Morale?
Higher level of Teacher Motivation?
© Hoy, 2013
Individual Teacher Academic Optimism
Academic Emphasis
Faculty Trust
Self-Efficacy
Individual Academic Optimism is a set of beliefs held by a teacher that he or she can:
1) Teach all students effectively---------------------------—Self-efficacy.
2) Trust students to learn and parents to support them —Trust in students & parents.
3) Set the bar high and emphasize academics----------- —Academic Emphasis.
Measures: TAOS-E for Elementary Teachers (Beard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2010)
TAOS-S for Secondary Teachers (Fahy, Wu, & Hoy, 2010)
© Hoy, 2013
RESEARCH AGENDA FOR ACADEMIC OPTIMISM
B. Teacher- Level Questions? [Antecedents and Consequences]
1. What personal characteristics facilitate individual teacher optimism? [ANTECEDENTS]
• Open-mindedness of Teacher?
• General disposition to be Optimistic.
• Self-Efficacy of the Teacher?
• Humanistic Pupil-Control Orientation?
• Professional Orientation?
• Bureaucratic Orientation?
• Teacher Mindfulness?
2. What are the consequences of individual teacher optimism? [CONSEQUENCES]
• Higher level of Student Engagement?
• Higher level of Student Motivation?
• Higher level of Student Achievement?
• Higher level of Student Satisfaction?
• Higher level of Student Optimism?
• Higher level of Student Self-Efficacy?
• Healthier relationships with the principal?
• Higher level of Cooperation and Collaboration with parents?
• Higher level of Professional Behavior?
3. What about Student Academic Optimism—Brand new concept and measure!!!! What gives students a sense of
academic optimism.
Next areas of inquiry—How important is the principal’s academic
optimism in schools? How about student academic optimism?
© Hoy, 2013
Other Dependent Variables
• Character of the School
• Well-Being of the School
• Positive Psy. Concepts from Seligman
Read: Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish. New York. Free Press.
© Hoy, 2013
Implications and Applications
• Cultivate trust in parents and students: Open and transparent
teacher-student relations is the hallmark of authenticity and an
apparent road to academic optimism and student achievement.
• Encourage collective self-efficacy: Efficacy is the engine of change,
reform, and achievement.
• Foster school academic emphasis: Stress and celebrate academic
successes—another path to enhanced achievement.
• View failure as a temporary setback and an opportunity for
learning; failure is natural so don’t berate others; to fail in one
situation is not to fail in all.
• Learn grit: practice resilience, self-discipline, and perseverance.
• Seek zest in school life: Be enthusiastic about what your day has in
store.
• Embrace academic optimism: A positive climate leads to both
increased achievement and well-being for all.
© Hoy, 2013
Suggested Readings
1. Beard, K. S., Hoy, W. K. and Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2010). Academic Optimism of New Teachers: Confirming a Construct.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1136-1144.
2. Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. (2013). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice(9th edition). New York:
McGraw Hill.
3. Smith, P. A. & Hoy, W. K. (2007). Academic optimism and student achievement in urban elementary schools. Journal of
Educational Administration, 45, 556-568.
4.* Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2006). Academic optimism of schools: A force for student achievement. American
Educational Research Journal, 43, 425-446.
5. McGuigan, L. & Hoy, W. K. (2006). Principal Leadership: Creating a Culture of Academic Optimism to Improve
Achievement for All Students. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5, 203-229.
6. Fahy, P. F., Wu, H. C., and Hoy, W. K. (2010), “Individual academic optimism of teachers: A new concept and its measure,”
in Hoy, W. K. and DiPaola, M. (Eds.), Analyzing School Contexts: Influences of Principals and Teachers in the Service of
Students, Information Age, Greenwich, CT, pp. 209-227.
7. Adams, C. A. and Forsyth, P. B. (2011). “Student academic optimism: Confirming a construct”, in DiPaola, M. & Forsyth,
P. B. (Eds.). Leading Research in Educational Administration: A Festschrift for Wayne K. Hoy, Information Age,
Greenwich, CT, pp. 73-88.
8. Forsyth, P. A., Adams, C. & Hoy, W. K. (2011). Collective Trust: Why Schools Cannot Improve Without It. New York:
Columbia TC Press—Chapter 6.
9. Beard, K. S., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy (2010). The nature, meaning, and measure of flow. A test of rival hypotheses.
Educational
Administration Quarterly, 46, 426-458.
10. *Hoy, W. K. (2012). School characteristics that make a difference for the achievement of all students: A 40-year academic
odyssey. Journal of Educational Administration.
© Hoy, 2013