KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Research in Educational Administration and Leadership / 2026 / Volume: 11 Issue: 3

How Instructional Leadership Influences Teachers’ Innovative Work Behavior: Understanding the Mediating Role of Teacher Commitment and Professional Collaboration

Erhan Dolapcı(Kastamonu Göl Anadolu Lisesi)0000-0003-2257-768X
Feyzi Uluğ0000-0002-4159-6440
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-09-27
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The findings contribute theoretically by clarifying the mechanisms through which principals foster teachers’ innovative work behavior, and practically by offering insights for school leaders and policymakers seeking to cultivate teacher collaboration, strengthen commitment, and stimulate innovative work behavior in schools.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study investigates how principals’ instructional leadership influences teachers’ innovative work behavior, with teacher commitment and teacher professional collaboration as mediating mechanisms.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Drawing on a cross-sectional survey of 812 teachers working in public schools in Türkiye, structural equation modelling with bootstrapping was employed to examine the direct and indirect effects of instructional leadership.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The findings contribute theoretically by clarifying the mechanisms through which principals foster teachers’ innovative work behavior, and practically by offering insights for school leaders and policymakers seeking to cultivate teacher collaboration, strengthen commitment, and stimulate innovative work behavior in schools.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Instructional leadership · teacher commitment · teacher professional collaboration

Abstract

This study investigates how principals’ instructional leadership influences teachers’ innovative work behavior, with teacher commitment and teacher professional collaboration as mediating mechanisms. Drawing on a cross-sectional survey of 812 teachers working in public schools in Türkiye, structural equation modelling with bootstrapping was employed to examine the direct and indirect effects of instructional leadership. The results indicate that instructional leadership has significant positive effects on both teacher commitment and teacher professional collaboration, which in turn enhance teachers’ innovative work behavior. Furthermore, the findings show that the mediating effects of teacher commitment and teacher professional collaboration are stronger than the direct effect of instructional leadership, underscoring their central role in linking school leadership practices with teachers’ innovative work behavior. By providing empirical evidence from a centralized education system, this study extends the international literature on instructional leadership and teacher innovation. The findings contribute theoretically by clarifying the mechanisms through which principals foster teachers’ innovative work behavior, and practically by offering insights for school leaders and policymakers seeking to cultivate teacher collaboration, strengthen commitment, and stimulate innovative work behavior in schools.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Dolapcı, E., Uluğ, F. (2026). How Instructional Leadership Influences Teachers’ Innovative Work Behavior: Understanding the Mediating Role of Teacher Commitment and Professional Collaboration. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, Volume: 11 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1865188

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (95)

  1. Almessabi, A., & Alhosani, M. (2024). How Principals Influence Teachers’ Innovative Work Behavior: A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Educational Reform. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879241238363
  2. Andiliou, A., & Murphy, P. K. (2010). Examining variations among researchers’ and teachers’ conceptualizations of creativity: A review and synthesis of contemporary research. Educational Research Review, 5, 201–219. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.003
  3. Arslan, K., Savaş, G. & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2025). Enhancing teacher innovative practices through principal learning-centred leadership and teacher knowledge sharing. British Educational Research Journal, 00, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.70067
  4. Awang-Hashim, R., Thaliah, R., & Kaur, A. (2017). A cultural insight into the development of teacher autonomy support scale A self-determination theory perspective. Journal for Multicultural Education, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-09-2016-0050
  5. Bada, A. H., Ariffin, T. F. T., & Nordin, B. H. (2020). The effectiveness of teachers in Nigerian secondary schools: The role of instructional leadership of principals. International Journal of Leadership in Education. doi:10.1080/13603124.2020.1811899
  6. Barnett, V., & Lewis, T. (1978). Outliers in statistical data. New York: Wiley.
  7. Bawuro, F. A. (2018). Factors influencing innovative behaviour of teachers in secondary schools in the north east of Nigeria. Path of Science, 4(3), 1007–1017. https://doi.org/10.22178/pos.32-9
  8. Bellibaş, M. S., Polatcan, M., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2020). Linking instructional leadership to teacher practices: The mediating effect of shared practice and agency in learning effectiveness. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. doi:10.1177/1741143220945706
  9. Blase, J., & Blase, J. (2000). Effective instructional leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 130–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09578230010320082
  10. Borasi, R., & Finnigan, K. (2010). Entrepreneurial attitudes and behaviors that can help prepare successful change-agents in education. The New Educator, 6(1), 1–29.
  11. Bush, T., Abdul Hamid, S., Ng, A. & Kaparou, M. (2018). School leadership theories and the Malaysia education blueprint: Findings from a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(7), 1245–1265.
  12. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming (multivariate applications series). New York: Taylor and Francis Group.
  13. Cansoy, R., Polatcan, M., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2018). An evaluation of school principals’ instructional leadership behaviours from the perspective of teachers. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 24(4): 579–622. doi: 10.14527/kuey.2018.015
  14. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: a review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–44.
  15. Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221-258.
  16. De Jong, J. P. J., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x
  17. Dhar, R. L. (2016). Ethical leadership and its impact on service innovative behavior: The role of LMX and job autonomy. Tourism Management, 57, 139–148.
  18. Dolapcı, E., & Uluğ, F. (2023). Turkish adaptation of teacher commitment scale. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 12(2), 39-52.
  19. Dörner, N. (2012). Innovative work behavior: The roles of employee expectations and effects on job performance (Doctoral dissertation). https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.993.4081andrep=rep1andtype=pdf
  20. Efron, B. (1982). The Jackknife, the bootstrap and other resampling plans. Pennsylvania, USA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
  21. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London: Sage.
  22. Firestone, W. A., & Pennell, J. R. (1993). Teacher commitment, working conditions, and differential incentive policies. Review of Educational Research, 63, 489–525.
  23. Geijsel, F. P., Sleegers, P. J. C., Stoel, R. D., & Krüger, M. L. (2009). The effect of teacher psychological and school organizational and leadership factors on teachers’ professional learning in Dutch schools. Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 406–427.
  24. Gkorezis P (2016). Principal empowering leadership and teacher innovative behavior: a moderated mediation model. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(6), 1030–1044, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-08-2015-0113
  25. Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2018). Supervision and instructional leadership: a developmental approach (Tenth). Pearson.
  26. Goddard, R., Goddard, Y., Sook Kim, E., et al. (2015). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the roles of instructional leadership, teacher collaboration, and collective efficacy beliefs in support of student learning. American Journal of Education, 121(4), 501–530.
  27. Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., Bailes, L. P. & Nichols, R. (2019). From school leadership to differentiated instruction: A pathway to student learning in schools. Elementary School Journal, 120(2), 197–219.
  28. Gümüş, S., Apaydın, Ç., & Bellibaş, M. Ş. (2018). Adaptation of teacher professional learning scale to Turkish: the validity and reliability study. Journal of Education and Humanities: Theory and Practice, 9(17), 107–124.
  29. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329–352. https://doi.org/10. 1080/0305764032000122005
  30. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5–44.
  31. Hallinger, P. & Kulophas, D. (2020). The evolving knowledge base on leadership and teacher professional learning: A bibliometric analysis of the literature, 1960–2018. Professional Development in Education, 46(4), 521–540.
  32. Hallinger, P., Liu, S., & Piyaman, P. (2019). Does principal leadership make a difference in teacher professional learning? A comparative study China and Thailand. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 49(3), 341–357.
  33. Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional leadership behavior of principals. Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–248.
  34. Hallinger, P., & Wang, W. C. (2015). Assessing instructional leadership with the principal instructional management rating scale. Dordrecht: Springer.
  35. Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Paper presented at the Australian Council for Educational Research Annual Conference on Building Teacher Quality, Melbourne.
  36. Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Abingdon: Routledge.
  37. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated mediation: Quantifiation, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4–40.
  38. Heck, R. H. (1993). School context, principal leadership, and achievement: The case of secondary schools in Singapore. The Urban Review, 25(2), 151–166.
  39. Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2014). Modeling the longitudinal effects of school leadership on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 653–681.
  40. Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM Standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 3–19.
  41. Hsieh, C. C., Tai, S. E., & Li, H. C. (2024). Impact of school leadership on teacher innovativeness: evidence from multilevel analysis of Taiwan TALIS 2018. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2397040
  42. Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications, (pp.76–99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  43. Huber, S. G. (2008). School development and school leader development: New learning opportunities for school leaders and their schools. In: Lumby J, Crow G and Pashiardis P (eds) International Handbook on the Preparation and Development of School Leaders. New York, NY: Routledge, pp.163–175.
  44. Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 287–302.
  45. Kılınç, A. Ç., Erdoğan, O., Savaş, G., Dolapcı, E., & Arslan, K. (2025). Leading teacher innovative practices in a centralized education system: the role of transformational leadership, teacher growth mindset and long-term orientation. Journal of Educational Administration, 63(5), 426–441. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2025-0015
  46. Kılınç, A. Ç., Polatcan, M., Savaş, G., & Er, E. (2022). How transformational leadership influences teachers’ commitment and innovative practices: Understanding the moderating role of trust in principal. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221082803
  47. Klaeijsen, A., Vermeulen, M., & Martens, R. (2017). Teachers’ innovative behaviour: The importance of basic psychological need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, and occupational self-efficacy. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(5), 769–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2017.1306803
  48. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd Edition). New York: The Guilford Press.
  49. Kundu, A., & Roy, D. D. (2016). School climate perception and innovative work behaviour of school teachers. International Journal of Education and Psychological Research, 5, 129–133. https://doi.org/10.21863/johb/2016.5.1.024
  50. Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(4), 498–518.
  51. Leithwood, K., Patten, S., & Jantzi, D. (2010). Testing a conception of how school leadership influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 671–706.
  52. Leithwood, K., Sun, J., & Schumacker, R. (2019). How school leadership influences student learning: A test of “The four paths model”. Educational Administration Quarterly. doi:10.1177/0013161X19878772.
  53. Levine, T. H., & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers’ collaborative activities facilitate and constrain teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 389–398.
  54. Liu, Y., Bellibaş, M. Ş., & Gümüş, S. (2020). The effect of instructional leadership and distributed leadership on teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Mediating roles of collaboration and teacher trust. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 48(2), 264–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218781066
  55. Liu, S., Hallinger, P., & Feng, D. (2016). Supporting the professional learning of teachers in China: Does principal leadership make a difference? Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 79–91.
  56. Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: an integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370–397.
  57. Meyer, A., Richter, D., & Hartung-Beck, V. (2022). The relationship between principal leadership and teacher collaboration: Investigating the mediating effect of teachers’ collective efficacy. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 50(4): 593–612.
  58. Messmann, G., & Mulder, R. H. (2011). Innovative work behaviour in vocational colleges: How and why innovations are developed. Vocations and Learning, 4, 63–84.
  59. Messmann, G., & Mulder, R. H. (2014). Exploring the role of target specificity in the facilitation of vocational teachers’ innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(1), 80–101.
  60. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). Türkiye’s 2023 education vision. https://tegm.meb.gov.tr/www/2023-vizyonu/icerik/23
  61. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024a). National education statistics formal education 2023/24. https://sgb.meb.gov.tr/www/milli-egitim-istatistikleri-orgun-egitim-20232024/icerik/629
  62. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024b). Teaching profession law. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2024/10/20241018-1.htm
  63. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024c). The Century of Türkiye Education Model: Common text of curriculum programs.
  64. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. J. (2010). Occupying the principal position: Examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools’ innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623–670.
  65. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2011). Ties with potential: Social network structure and innovative climate in Dutch schools. Teachers College Record, 113, 1983–2017.
  66. Neumerski, C. M. (2013). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here? Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 310–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X12456700
  67. Nir, A. E. (2002). School-based management and its effect on teacher commitment. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 5(4), 323–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603120210134616
  68. Nguyen, D., & Ng, D. (2020). Teacher collaboration for change: Sharing, improving, and spreading. Professional Development in Education, 46(4), 638–651.
  69. Nguyen, D., Pietsch, M., & Gümüş, S. (2021). Collective teacher innovativeness in 48 countries: Effects of teacher autonomy, collaborative culture, and professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103463
  70. Özkan, B. & Akman, Y. (2024). The relationship between school principals' distributed leadership behaviors and teachers' innovative work behaviors. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 22(2), 1384-1405. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1450813
  71. Paletta, A., Alimehmeti, G., Mazzetti, G., & Guglielmi, D. (2021). Educational leadership and innovative teaching practices: a polynomial regression and response surface analysis. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(4), 897–908.
  72. Park, I. (2005). Teacher commitment and its effects on student achievement in American high schools. Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice 11(5), 461–485.
  73. Pietsch, M., Cramer, C., Brown, C., Aydin, B., & Witthöft, J. (2024). Open Innovation in Schools: A New Imperative for Organising Innovation in Education? Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 29, 1051–1077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09705-2
  74. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891.
  75. Razak, N. A., Darmawan, I. G. N., & Keeves, J. P. (2010). The influence of culture on teacher commitment. Social Psychology of Education, 13(2), 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-009-9109-z
  76. Robinson, V., Hohepa, M., & Lloyd, C. (2009). School leadership and student outcomes: identifying what works and why. Best evidence synthesis iteration (BES). Auckland: The Ministry of New Zealand.
  77. Ross, J. A., & Gray, P. (2006). School leadership and student achievement: The mediating effects of teacher beliefs. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(3), 798–822. doi:10.2307/20054196.
  78. Saboe, K.N., Taing, M.U., Way, J.D., & Johnson, R.E. (2015). Examining the unique mediators that underlie the effects of different dimensions of transformational leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 22(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051814561028
  79. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. New Jersey. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  80. Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607.
  81. Sebastian, J., & Allensworth, E. (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 626–663.
  82. Sebastian, J., Allensworth, E., & Huang, H. (2016). The role of teacher leadership in how principals influence classroom instruction and student learning. American Journal of Education, 123(1): 69–108. https://doi.org/10.1086/688169
  83. Serdyukov, P. (2017). Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching and Learning, 10(1), 4–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007
  84. Sheppard, B. (1996). Exploring the transformational nature of instructional leadership. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 325–344.
  85. Skelton, M. T. (2019). The relationship between instructional leadership and organizational commitment of teachers (Doctoral dissertation). https://digitalcommons.latech.edu/dissertations/43
  86. Thien, L. M., Razak, N. A., & Ramayah, T. (2014). Validating teacher commitment scale using a Malaysian sample. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014536744
  87. Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3): 496–536.
  88. Thurlings, M., Evers, A., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430–471.
  89. Töre, E. (2017). An examination of the impacts of intellectual capital on innovative work behavior from the perspective of knowledge sharing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). İstanbul University.
  90. Truijen, K. J. P., Sleegers, P. L. C., Meelissen, M. R. M., et al. (2013). What makesteacher teams in a vocational education context effective? A qualitative study of managers’ view on team working. Journal of Workplace Learning, 25(1), 58–73.
  91. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17–40.
  92. Werleman, A. A. (2016). Effect of enriched job design on innovative work behaviour (Master’s thesis). http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=142234
  93. Widmann, A., & Mulder, R. H. (2018). Team learning behaviours and innovative work behaviour in work teams. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(3), 501–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-12-2017-0194
  94. Zainal, M. A., & Matore, M. E. E. M. (2019). Factors influencing teachers’ innovative behaviour: a systematic review. Creative Education, 10, 2869–2886. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1012213
  95. Zhu, J., Yao, J. & Zhang, L. (2019). Linking empowering leadership to innovative behavior in professional learning communities: the role of psychological empowerment and team psychological safety. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev., 20, 657–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09584-2