Conference Agenda

School climate is considered a multifaceted and malleable construct at the school level, making it a possible basis for improving school effectiveness and student achievement (e.g., Javornik & Klemenčič Mirazchiyski, 2023; Wang & Degol, 2016). A lack of consensus exists in the extant literature regarding a clear outline of school climate; however, there is a common understanding that it encompasses different aspects, such as performance-oriented climate or the institutional environment with its resources and demands (Wang & Degol, 2016). Empirical studies have reported an association between performance-oriented school climate and students' academic achievement, emphasizing its relevance for school-level efforts to improve students' academic achievement (e.g., Hoy, 2012). A school’s climate is shaped through the interactions of multiple stakeholders, including school principals, teachers, and students. Therefore, this symposium aims to explore the interplay of these different stakeholders and how they work together to create and maintain a performance-oriented school climate. For this purpose, the contributions of this symposium present a multi-perspective depiction of school systems in Switzerland, Belgium, and Germany.

The first contribution (Tulowitzki & Schmitz) focuses on school principals as key stakeholders of schools, who are essential in establishing a performance-oriented school climate (Leithwood et al., 2020). The position of school principals is often associated with high levels of stress, which can lead to turnover and often aligns with reduced capacities for improvement at schools (Rogers et al., 2025). Against this background, structural equation models are used to examine which factors, especially resources and demands (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007) of Swiss school principals, are associated with turnover or exit intentions. The authors of the study conclude that it may be more promising to prioritize the enhancement of resources rather than reducing demands.

The second contribution (Lelieur) adds on to the previous contribution by examining the interplay between school principals and teachers. Specifically, the construct of academic optimism as a crucial part of school climate is examined (Hoy, 2012). Accordingly, an investigation of a potential positive association of school leadership (i.e., performance management for academic optimism) and teacher academic optimism is conducted, with the consideration of attribution patterns among teachers (Weiner, 2010). For this purpose, Belgian teachers and school principals are analyzed using structural equation modelling at the teacher level. The results suggest that performance-oriented leadership plays a role in shaping teachers’ understanding of student performance by promoting explanations that are more changeable. This also goes along with higher teacher academic optimism.

The last contribution (Becher et al.) extends this by examining the direct interplay between school principals and students regarding the academic optimism of a school. More specifically, potential longitudinal associations between schools' academic optimism and students' academic achievement are investigated. For this purpose, school panel data from German school principals and students are analyzed. The findings indicate a direct association between school principals' view of academic optimism (i.e., collective efficacy) and students' academic achievement. However, the reading achievement development from 2016 to 2021 is not related to the facets of academic optimism.

Overall, the contributions of this symposium suggest that the school climate (i.e., performance-oriented school climate) is an aspect that affects all areas and stakeholders of the schools. Importantly, it becomes apparent that school principals play a pivotal role in establishing and sustaining a performance-oriented school climate. Moreover, these findings from three countries with diverse school systems indicate the importance of this phenomenon on a broader scale. Furthermore, the symposium demonstrates methodological diversity, employing methods such as multi-level structural equation modeling or linear-mixed effect models using longitudinal data. The individual contributions of the symposium and their collective relevance will be discussed by Professor David Gurr.

Principals are central to establishing a performance-oriented school climate where student achievement can flourish (Leithwood & Hopkins, 2020; Tan et al., 2024). Leadership actions influence relationships among stakeholders such as teachers, students, parents, and the broader community. However, leadership positions are demanding and stress-prone, with some leaders contemplating leaving their school or the profession. Such turnover can disrupt and diminish the collective capacity for improvement (Rogers et al., 2025). This study examines factors associated with Swiss school leaders’ turnover intentions through the lens of the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model, connecting leadership well-being to the broader climate in schools (see Demerouti & Bakker, 2011). The JD-R framework posits two processes: the health impairment process and the motivational process (Demerouti & Bakker, 2007). Focusing on the motivational process in the JD-R model and based on previous studies on principals turnover intention (see Skaalvik, 2020; Snodgrass Rangel, 2018; Yan, 2020) we hypothesized that psychological safety and self-efficacy (resources) would positively predict job satisfaction (motivational aspect), while overtime and low school so-cioeconomic status (demands) would negatively affect it. We further expected job satisfaction to mediate the relationship between these predictors and turnover intentions. In October 2024 an online questionnaire was completed by 2,539 school leaders (42% of all Swiss principals). Measures included validated scales for turnover intentions, job satisfaction, psychological safety, self-efficacy, overtime, and perceived school socioeconomic status (Agho et al., 1992; Fischer & Hüttermann, 2020). Analyses comprised descriptive statistics, correlations, and two structural equation models (SEMs), one for each turnover intention outcome. Findings show that job demands didn’t significantly predict job satisfaction or turnover intentions. Psychological safety had significant direct and indirect (via job satisfaction) negative effects on both transfer and exit intentions. Self-efficacy had a significant indirect effect on both intentions via job satisfaction and an additional direct positive effect on transfer intentions, suggesting that highly self-efficient leaders may be more willing to change schools without leaving the profession. One explanation might be that highly self-efficient school principals are confident that they can be successful not only at their current school but also others. In terms of practical implications, the study stresses the importance of strengthening job resources over minimizing job demands to prevent principal turnover and ensure job satisfaction. Given that similar challenges and stakeholder dynamics exist in many countries, these findings contribute to the international discussion resources and demands of school leaders.

Agho, A. O., Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1992). Discriminant validity of measures of job satis-faction, positive affectivity and negative affectivity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(3), 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1992.tb00496.x Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources modelJournal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2011). The Job Demands-Resources model. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(2), 01–09. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v37i2.974 Fischer, J. A., & Hüttermann, H. (2020). PsySafety-Check (PS-C). ZIS - GESIS. https://zis.gesis.org/DoiId/zis279 Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077 Rogers, L., Nguyen, T., Timmer, M., & Samson, J. (2025). Principal Burnout: A Systematic Re-view. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5096001 Skaalvik, C. (2020). Self-efficacy for instructional leadership. Social Psychology of Education, 23(5), 1343–1366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09585-9 Snodgrass Rangel, V. (2018). A Review of the Literature on Principal Turnover. Review of Educa-tional Research, 88(1), 87–124. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317743197 Tan, C. Y., Dimmock, C., & Walker, A. (2024). How school leadership practices relate to student outcomes. EMAL, 52(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211061445 Yan, R. (2020). The Influence of Working Conditions on Principal Turnover in K-12 Public Schools. EEQ, 56(1), 89–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19840391

Unveiling school factors that enhance student performance beyond background characteristics is a core goal for educational research, policy, and practice. Teacher academic optimism (TAO) integrates teachers’ efficacy, trust in students and parents, and academic emphasis, and has been associated with higher achievement after accounting for student background (Ates & Unal, 2021), highlighting its potential to advance both excellence and equity (Hoy, 2012). Attribution theory adds a motivational mechanism (Weiner, 2010): when teachers explain challenges through controllable and changeable causes, they are more likely to adapt instruction and persist, whereas fixed and external explanations, such as student background, foster resignation (Wang et al., 2015). We hypothesise that performance management for academic optimism (PMAO), a leadership style that aligns expectations, feedback, and teacher behaviour with academic optimism (Lelieur et al., 2024), strengthens TAO directly and indirectly by promoting more adaptive attribution patterns. The study draws on survey data collected from 878 teachers in 31 secondary schools in Flanders (Belgium) and employs validated measures of PMAO and the subcomponents of TAO. Teachers’ attributions were captured by asking to what extent specific factors positively influence student achievement and were grouped into four categories based on locus, stability, and controllability. Structural equation modelling was conducted at the teacher level to test direct and indirect effects while accounting for measurement error, clustering within schools (MLR), and missing data (FIML) (Kline, 2005). Models were estimated in R (lavaan) and showed acceptable to good fit (CFI = .910, SRMR = .072, RMSEA = .043). Results indicate that PMAO is positively related to all attribution categories, most strongly to attributions that locate influence in school leadership (external, instable, uncontrollable) (β = .513***) and to teachers’ own behaviour (β = .387***). These internal, controllable, unstable attributions show strong positive associations with all subcomponents of teacher academic optimism (β = .208** to .484***), supporting the central role of adaptive attribution patterns. In addition, attributing positive outcomes to unstable student behavioural factors relates positively to trust in students (β = .116*) and parents (β = .168**), whereas attributing outcomes to stable student background factors relates negatively to academic emphasis (β = -.118*). Direct associations between PMAO and TAO are present but smaller, with the overall pattern indicating substantial mediation via attribution. Together, these findings suggest that performance-oriented leadership can shape teachers’ sensemaking about student performance by strengthening malleable, professionally actionable explanations, which in turn aligns with higher teacher academic optimism.

Ates, A., & Unal, A. (2021). The relationship between teacher academic optimism and student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Psycho-Educational Research Reviews, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.52963/perr_biruni_v10.n2.20 Hoy, W. K. (2012). School characteristics that make a difference for the achievement of all students: A 40-year odyssey. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211196078 Kline, R. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press. Lelieur, R., Vanhoof, J., & Clycq, N. (2024). Explaining academic optimism in schools: The impact of performance leadership and alignment between teachers, students, and parents. International Journal of Educational Research, 128, 102477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102477 Wang, H., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2015). Self-efficacy and causal attributions in teachers: Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.005 Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433596

Academic optimism (i.e., academic emphasis, collective efficacy, and faculty trust) describes the striving for a high-achieving learning environment (Hoy, 2012; Hoy et al., 2006). It has been identified as an important factor for students’ academic achievement at the school level to directly promote academic achievement, independent of their family background (e.g., Hoy et al., 2006). So far, mostly empirical studies using cross-sectional designs have revealed a statistically significant positive relationship between academic optimism and academic achievement (e.g., Badri, 2019). Current research using school-level longitudinal designs spanning more than two years is comparatively scarce, particularly for studies focusing on elementary schools, a critical stage in a child’s school career (e.g., student-level: Goddard et al., 2017; country-level: Gustafsson & Nilsen, 2016). This study investigated the association between academic optimism and students' reading achievement at the school level over five years. Specifically, we examined the school's academic optimism in 2016 and its relationship to the reading achievement of the fourth-grade students in 2021 (research question 1), as well as its association with the change in reading achievement from 2016 to 2021 (research question 2). To analyze these research questions, we used data from school principals and fourth-grade students from N = 111 schools participating in a school panel study in Germany in 2016 and 2021. We focused on analyzing the long-term relationship of all three facets of academic optimism on students’ reading achievement by using linear mixed-effect models and considering central control variables (e.g., socioeconomic status and migration background) on the individual and the school level. The results indicated a statistically significant positive association between collective efficacy in 2016 and students' reading achievement in 2021, even when considering the control variables. For academic emphasis and faculty trust, the analyses did not reveal a statistically significant relationship with the reading achievement of students attending fourth grade five years later. Regarding the reading achievement at the school level, a statistically significant decline from 2016 to 2021 was evident. However, this development was not moderated by the facets of academic optimism. The study reveals important findings regarding the relevance of academic optimism and, particularly, collective efficacy for students’ academic achievement in elementary schools. Additionally, the panel data structure also enabled the detection of the missing protective function of academic optimism against the negative development of achievement. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Badri, M. (2019). School emphasis on academic success and TIMSS science/math achievements. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 5(1), 176–189. Goddard, R. D., Skrla, L., & Salloum, S. J. (2017). The role of collective efficacy in closing student achievement gaps: A mixed methods study of school leadership for excellence and equity. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 22(4), 220–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2017.1348900 Gustafsson, J. E., & Nilsen, T. (2016). The impact of school climate and teacher quality on mathematics achievement: A difference-in-differences approach. In T. Nilsen & J.-E. Gustafsson (Eds.), Teacher Quality, Instructional Quality and Student Outcomes (Vol. 2, pp. 81–95). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41252-8_4 Hoy, W. K. (2012). School characteristics that make a difference for the achievement of all students: A 40‐year odyssey. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211196078 Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Hoy, A. W. (2006). Academic optimism of schools: A force for student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 425–446. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043003425