Cypriot Journal of

Educational Sciences
Volume 08, Issue 3, (2013) 309-319
www.awer-center/cjes

A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School
Chain

Sinem Vatanartran *, Department of Educational Sciences, Baheehir University, Istanbul, Turkey.


Suggested Citation:
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot
Journal of Educational Sciences. 8(3), 309-319.

Received 02 March, 2013; revised 24 June, 2013; accepted 25 August, 2013.
Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Huseyin Uzunboylu & Assist. Prof. Dr. Cigdem
Hursen, Near East University.

2013 SPROC LTD. Academic World Education & Research Center. All rights reserved.

Abstract

School climate can vary from school to school within the same district and an individual school can
develop a climate independently of the larger organization. The research question is whether schools that
operate under the same school chain show similar or different school environment factors with regards to
parents, students, and teachers. This is a case study where data is collected quantitatively. The case was
selected by using purposeful sampling method. 3 of the elementary schools in this school chain located in
the same city were included into this study. To collect data, Learning Environments Survey was used.
There are 7 factors in the survey: Satisfaction, Principals Leadership, Effective Communication, Service
Satisfaction, Identity, and Climate. To analyze data, one-way ANOVA and descriptive statistics were done.
The analysis of the surveys administered to parents, students, and teachers showed significant differences
in the factors of Principal and Communication amongst teachers, Academic Satisfaction, Communication,
and Identity amongst students, and Identity amongst parents.

Keywords: School climate, learning environments, school management, creating school culture and
climate.










*ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Sinem Vatanartran, Department of Educational Sciences, Baheehir University,
Istanbul. E-mail address: sinem.vatanartiran@bahcesehir.edu.tr / Tel: +90212-3810317
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

310
1. Introduction
Organizational climate refers to the shared perceptions of organizational policies, practices,
and procedures, both formal and informal (Reichers & Schneider, 1990). This description defines
climate as a similar concept with culture. However, Schein (1985) makes the distinction between
the two by referring culture as deeper, unconsciously held assumptions that help to guide
organizational members. With this referral, climate shows itself as the manifestation of culture
and the surface level indicator of culture. As also asserted by Watkins (2012), climate is the
easily seen behaviors in a school organization, while culture can be described as the underlying
belief and value system found in the members. Culture causes the specific behaviors that occur
in the school seen by others as the climate. As a nutshell definition, the quality of the
environment as experienced by organizational members is generally referred to as
organizational climate (Rafferty, 2003). Taking the definitions of organizational climate as the
basis, school climate can be defined as the learning environment created through the
interaction of human relationships, physical setting and psychological atmosphere (Perkins,
2006).
Van Horn (2003) discusses whether climate is a property of schools or a subjective perception
of the school by its participants. Both perspectives have gained advocates. However, given that
schools are organizations, studies on organizational climate seem relevant to the study of school
climate. In that case, research on organizational climate generally concur that the unit of theory
is not the organization, but the individual (James, 1982). This view proposes that there is no
property of the organization that could be called its climate; instead the climate will be different
for each participant in the organization based on personal characteristics, experiences and
perceptions of the organization. However, individuals climate ratings could still be combined to
form a measure of climate quality for the organization (James, 1982; Lindell & Brandt, 2000).
Therefore, the extent to which individuals agree on the climate could be measured and used as
a separate predictor of outcomes, as well (Lindell & Brandt).
To identify the climate, one must understand the following factors as major forces in the
culture: safety, relationships, teaching and learning, and the institutional environment (Cohen,
et al, 2009). The Brief report (Tableman, 2004) defines school climate in terms of four aspects of
the school environment: A physical environment that is welcoming and conducive to learning, a
social environment that promotes communication and interaction, an affective environment
that promotes a sense of belonging and self-esteem, and an academic environment that
promotes learning and self-fulfillment.
In his significant work that analyses the school climate literature based on over 200
references, Anderson (1982) categorizes the factors of school climate used in various school
climate theories and related instruments under four main variables. These variables have the
following components in various studies: ecology variables (building characteristics and size),
milieu (teacher characteristics, teacher morale, student body characteristics, student morale),
social system variables (administrative organization, instructional program, ability grouping,
administrator-teacher rapport, teacher shared decision-making, good communication, teacher-
student relationships, student shared decision-making, opportunity for student participation,
teacher-teacher relationships, community-school relationships, involvement in instruction), and
culture variables (teacher commitment, peer norms, cooperative emphasis, expectations,
emphasis on academics, rewards and praise, consistency, consensus, clear goals).

1.1. Effects of Positive School Climate
School climate has been widely recognized as an important component of successful schools
and an influential predictor of childrens academic success (Van Horn, 2003; Bulach, Lunenburg
& Potter, 2008). It is seen as one of the most important factors in school effectiveness
(Anderson, 1982; Garland, 2004; Kreft, 1993; Miller & Fredericks, 1990; Purkey & Smith, 1983).
Research indicates that a positive school climate enhances motivation, increases educational
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

311
aspirations and improves attendance and retention and that there is a strong link between
school connectedness and student self-esteem (Blum, 2007; alk, Kurt & alk, 2011).
According to motivational theorists, student personal experiences of how well the school
environment supports individual needs mediate actual context effects (Roeser et al., 1998).
From this perspective, student perceptions of school climate are particularly important because
they shape student attitudes and cognitions about themselves and, in turn, contribute to their
outcomes (Loukas & Robinson, 2004).
One of the largest research projects on school climate was conducted by the Urban Student
Achievement Task Force of National School Boards of Association, called the CUBE project,
highlights important findings about contributions of improved school climate on higher student
achievement, higher morale among students and teachers, more reflective practice among
teachers, fewer student dropouts, reduced violence, better community relations, and increased
institutional pride (Perkins, 2006).
Similarly, in a review of studies on the impact of support in school, the Search Institute found
that a caring school climate is associated with higher grades, engagement, attendance,
expectations and aspirations, a sense of scholastic competence, fewer school suspensions,
higher self-esteem and self-concept, less anxiety, depression and loneliness, and less substance
abuse (Tableman, 2004).

1.2. School Climate and Leadership
Research on effective schools and instructional leadership emphasizes the impact of principal
leadership on creating safe and secure learning environment and positive nurturing school
climate. In his landmark research, Andrews (1965) identified a positive correlation between
principal personality and leadership style and the overall openness or closedness of school
climate. This means that open climate schools have confident, cheerful, sociable, and
resourceful principals, while principals in closed climate schools tend to be evasive, traditional,
worried, and frustrated.
In their study of three secondary schools on school climate and leadership, Dinham, Cairney,
Craigie and Wilson (1995) found out that the leadership of each school, particularly that of the
principal, had influenced school climate, educational performance, and teacher, student and
community satisfaction. In the school system, it should be the school leaders objective to create
or shape the homogeneity on the major constructs of safety, relationships, teaching and
learning, and the institutional environment (Watkins, 2012). As put forward by Dumay (2009),
principals can directly shape the perceptions and interpretations of the teaching staff, which
leads to formation of cultural homogeneity.
Positive school climate is created by servant leadership, shared leadership, and
transformational leadership, which are all types of leadership affecting culture and learning that
are constructs for improving student learning (Watkins, 2012). These leadership styles hold
transparency, trust, and shared decision making as central values. The leadership function
supports or inhibits learning and can help or hinder teacher collaboration, which is needed in
effective schools.
According to a research study carried out by ahin (2008), some of the practices of school
principals help to create a positive school climate. These practices can be summarized as the
distribution of responsibility based on volunteerism, democratic management, respect even to
marginal ideas, having mutual responsibility by shareholders, getting together for a lot more
informal circumstances, participation in decision-making, teamwork, transparency and
democratic approaches, organizing ceremonies that create positive communication between the
administrative staff and the students, principals being with the teachers all the time instead of
sitting in the office, principals visiting the teachers classes instead of calling the teachers to the
principals office, principals taking risks in favor of the teachers and the students.

Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

312
1.3. Aim of the Study
As suggested by Van Horn (2003), if school climate is conceptualized as a school-level
property, then all children within a school experience are affected by the same climate. If the
important aspect of climate were individual perception, then differences among individuals
within schools would be expected to influence outcomes. If students, their parents, and their
teachers have different perceptions of school climate, the influence of the schools climate on
each of them is expected to be different. This study aims to investigate if schools that operate
under the same school chain show similar or different school environment qualities that
influence school climate with the perceptions of parents, students, and teachers. The reason
behind this research is the assumption that the top management team of a school chain expects
similar school culture and climate to be created by the school principals at these schools.
Because, as suggested by Tableman (2004), school climate can vary from school to school within
the same district and an individual school can develop a climate independently of the larger
organization. The following research question is examined:
Do the schools that operate under the same school chain show similar or different school
environment factors with the perceptions of parents, students, and teachers?

2. Method
This is a case study where data is collected quantitatively. There are few private companies in
Turkey that operate several schools under the same brand name. Amongst these school chains,
the case was selected by using purposeful sampling method.

2.1. The Case
The case is the largest k-12 school chain in Turkey that has 27 elementary schools and 12 high
schools. In order to have the same standards of education in each school, the same curriculum is
implemented together with the same evaluation and assessment system. The top management
team is selecting and appointing the principal of each school. All of the principals and teachers
are offered the same in service training program focusing on school culture, educational
philosophy of the school, and the educational system of the school. In each school, the same
physical settings are created (size of the classrooms, teacher/student ratios, the laboratories,
sports facilities, even colours used in the building, etc). The tuition of the school is amongst the
highest in the country and high level of parent SES is targeted.
3 of the elementary schools in this school chain that are located in the same city are included
into this study. The schools are given a code in this study and the descriptive information about
them are shown in Table 1:
Table 1 Descriptive Information of the Schools

School Code Given Year of
Establishment
Number of
Students
Number of
Teachers
Elementary School 1 ESB 1994 1042 157
Elementary School 2 ESF 2006 761 95
Elementary School 3 ESJ 2008 558 58




Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

313
2.2. Data Collection

To investigate the research question, Sirin School Climate Survey was implemented. Data was
gathered from the students, parents, and teachers of each of these schools. A total of 296
teachers, 1275 students, and 924 parents were involved in the study.
Sirin School Climate Survey (2012) measures the learning environment at a school as a five-
factor concept by using data collected from the schools parents, students, and teachers. The
Survey consists of items categorized under five instruments, namely Academic Satisfaction,
Service Satisfaction, Quality of Communication, School Climate, and School Identity. The
sections are the same for instruments used for parents, teachers, and students with different
content for each. The aim of the Academic Satisfaction Instrument is to measure the
perceptions of students, teachers, and parents on the academic programs implemented at the
school. This instrument comprises both the academic interest and the academic expectations.
Service Satisfaction Survey aims at how non-curricular services at the school are evaluated by
the parents, teachers, and students. Quality of Communication Instrument aims at measuring
the quality, the frequency and the means of communication between the school administration
and teachers, school administration and students, students and teachers, and parents and
teachers. This instrument also consists of items on how effective principals are in terms of their
leadership focusing on their effective communication skills. School Climate Instrument aims at
measuring how safe and comfortable the parents, students, and teachers feel at the school. The
last instrument, School Identity, aims at measuring how knowledgeable teachers, students, and
parents are about the mission, vision, and the values of the school that constitute the schools
corporate identity and how loyal they are to these values. There are 71 items in the teacher
version, 63 items in the student version and 53 items in the parent version.

2.3. Data Analysis
To understand the climate in each school and to compare it with that of other schools, one-
way ANOVA, t-test, percentage, frequency, mean, standard deviation values, and reliability
analysis were done by using IBM SPSS software. In One-way ANOVA, Test of Homogeneity of
Variance prerequisite analysis of the scale was also done (p>.05). For significance of the findings
among groups, Tukey multi comparison test was used. In order to determine the range
normality, Kolmogorow-Simirnov Test and for reliability and other analysis, SPSS were
administered.

3. Findings
In general, most of the results showed no significant differences between these three schools
and the results of the parents, students, and teachers. Below, the results that showed significant
differences are shared in the categories of teachers, students, and parents separately.

3.1. Findings of Teachers Survey
The results of the survey taken by teachers show that amongst the subscales of Academic
Satisfaction, Effective Communication, Service Satisfaction, Climate, and Identity, there are
statistically significant differences in the results of the Academic Satisfaction and Effective
Communication. The t-test results of the variable of institution (kindergarten and elementary
school) and the dependent variable of academic satisfaction show that there is a significant
difference [t
(238)=
-1,97, p<.05] (Table 2).
Teachers who work at the elementary level of education (
-
= 10.44) put more ambitious
academic targets to the students compared to the teachers who work at the kindergarten level
of education (
-
= 9.51). However, this result is not surprising considering the general academic
expectations from these two levels of education. In kindergartens, instead of higher academic
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

314
achievements, social and emotional development of children constitutes the priority as
educational goals.

Table 2 T-test Results For The Variable of Institution Type of The Teachers and Academic Satisfaction
School Type N Mean SD df t p
Kindergarten 39 9,51 2,54
238 -1,97 ,05
Elementary 201 10,44 2,73

In the subscale of Effective Communication, there is a significant difference between the
school and the leaders communication skills as perceived by the teachers [F
(2-237)
= 4,740, p<
.05]. Scheffe multi comparison results in Table 3 show that teachers who work at ESB
( X =16.00) and ESJ ( X =15.075) think that their principals have more effective leadership skills
compared to the teachers who work at ESF ( X =14.40). These leadership skills included skills
like giving regular and effective feedback to teachers, having a clear vision that is communicated
to the stakeholders, sharing expectations clearly, and being trustworthy. This is an important
finding, as principalship is one of the major factors that shape the organizational culture and
climate as suggested by many researchers (Bozdoan & Sanak, 2011; Bulris, 2009; Halawah,
2005; Memduholu & eker, 2011; Rafferty, 2003). The school chain may control other factors
like academic satisfaction and effective communication strategies from the top; however,
principals leadership skills are a factor that cannot be directly controlled by the higher-level
management of the school chain. This finding shows that principals effective communication
and leadership skills are important attributes in differentiating schools from each other that
operate under the same organizational system.
Table 3 Schools and Leadership Qualities of Principals as Perceived by Teachers
School n X Sd F p
ESB 89 16,00 2,80
4,740 ,010
ESJ 59 15,75 2,83
ESF 92 14,40 3,61
Total 240 15,42 3,19

The last significant result in the teachers survey is effective communication with parents in
[F
(2-237)
= 7,10, p< .01]. This section of the instrument consisted of items related with effective
and regular communication with the parents about students progress, school activities, and
students behavioral problems. The Scheffe multi comparison shows that teachers who work at
ESJ ( X =10.08) think their school establishes better communication with their parents
compared to teachers who work at ESB ( X =9.36) and ESF ( X =9.07) (p<.05), as shown in Table
4. This finding shows that ESJs principal has better established the communication strategies
with the parents compared to the other 2 schools. As increased parent and community
involvement is one of the ways of improving school climate (Marshall, n.d.), both systemic
mechanisms from the top management to ensure parent involvement and principals leadership
to create and put such mechanisms into action are important contributors. Considering the fact
that this school chain expects the same standards in academic and non-academic targets and
practices, the principals play a significant role in creating the expected environments in their
schools.
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

315
Table 4 Schools and Effective Communication With Parents as Perceived by Teachers
School n
X
Sd F p
ESB 89 9,36 1,52
7,10 ,001
ESJ 59 10,08 1,40
ESF 92 9,07 1,82
Total 240 9,43 1,66

3.2. Findings of Students Survey
The results of the survey taken by students show that amongst the subscales of Academic
Satisfaction, Effective Communication, Service Satisfaction, Climate, and Identity, there are
statistically significant differences in the results of the Academic Satisfaction, Effective
Communication, and Identity. In Academic Satisfaction subscale, there is a significant difference
between the grade levels of the students and teachers contribution to their academic success.
Scheffe multi comparison shows that (Table 5) the 5
th
grade students ( X =27.18) think that their
teachers help them more, encourage them more to be successful, support their academic
targets, and acknowledge their achievements more when compared with the 7
th
graders
( X =25.72) and 8
th
graders ( X =25.18) (p<.05). This finding is similar to the findings of Doans
study (2012). Even though the participants were high school students in his study, similarly, the
lower grade students had more positive opinions about their teachers contributions to their
academic achievement.

Table 5 Grade levels and teachers contributions to academic achievement

Grades n X Sd F p
Grade 5 184 27,18 3,64
10,39 ,00
Grade 6 208 26,38 3,71
Grade 7 170 25,72 4,37
Grade 8 233 25,18 3,59
Total 795 26,07 3,88

In the same subscale, the findings show that the higher the grade level is, academically the
less satisfied students are [F
(3-791)
= 10,39, p< .05]. Table 6 shows that in the higher grades,
students think that their teachers are less respectful to them, inspire them less, offer less real-
life examples in the lessons (p<.05). This result could be explained with the increased academic
preparation for the national high school entrance exams. In the higher grades, teachers may
have a tendency to implement more test-oriented lessons. zdemir et. al.,s study (2010)
suggested that supportive and encouraging teacher behavior is critical to create a positive
school climate and that teachers who encourage students to achieve better and to study harder,
who takes into account students need for love, belonging and achievement are perceived to be
more effective teachers.




Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

316
Table 6 Grade levels and academic satisfaction in relation with teachers approach to students
Grade n X Sd F p
Grade 5 184 24,12 3,33
19,65 ,000
Grade 6 208 23,40 3,95
Grade 7 170 22,63 4,01
Grade 8 233 21,33 4,26
Total 795 22,80 4,06

Another subscale that showed significant difference in the students survey is the Identity.
This subscale included items about corporate identity and associated common values and
feeling belongingness towards the institution. When compared with ESB students ( X =5,05),
students who study at ESF ( X = 5.53) think that it is a privilege to study at this institution and
that this institution is associated with positive values like open-mindedness, respect, and being
innovative (p<.05) (Table 7). In the same subscale, there were no significant differences in the
results of the teachers and parents. In this subscale, students who study at ESF have a different
experience.
Table 7 School and Identity with Respect to Feeling of Belongingness to the School
School n X Sd F P
ESB 341 5,05 1,69
5,97 ,003
ESJ 198 5,30 1,65
ESF 257 5,53 1,67
Total 796 5,27 1,68

Effective Communication is another subscale where there is a significant difference between
the school variable and the students opinions on the time allocated for students by teachers
and administrators [F
(2-793)
= 6,82, p< .001]. Students who study at ESJ ( X =6,06) and ESF
( X =6,06) think that when they have a problem at school, their teachers and administrators
allocate more time and show more attention to them, when compared with students who study
at ESB ( X =5,67). (p<.05). In the teachers survey, ESJs mean score was higher in effective
communication subscale with respect to communication with parents. This finding shows that
among these three schools, ESJ has consistently established positive communication with both
parents and students.
The grades of the students have a significant relationship with their communication level with
the teachers [F
(3-791)
= 5,11, p< .05]. 8
th
graders ( X = 5.79) stated that they could talk about their
problems in class with their teachers comfortably compared to 5
th
graders ( X =5.10) (p<.05).
This could be related with their age, as 5
th
graders may feel themselves shyer whereas 8
th

graders may have more self-confidence.



Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

317
3.3. Findings of Parents Survey
The results of the survey taken by parents show that amongst the subscales of Academic
Satisfaction, Effective Communication, Service Satisfaction, Climate, and Identity, the only
significant difference is found in the subscale of Climate. In the other subscales, the results were
not significant. The Climate subscale included items related with respect and safety. Parents of
ESJ ( X =9.96) think that their children are bullied more by their peers and that both students
and teachers behave more disrespectfully to each other compared to parents of ESB
( X =15.075) and ESF ( X =9.28) (Table 8). This result confirms the findings related with the
subscale of Effective Communication that ESJ as a school has more constant communication
with parents according to teachers views. As the school has more communication with parents,
parents are more knowledgeable about the problems related with bullying and respect their
children face in the school.
Table 8 School Variable and Climate With the Perception of Parents
School n X Sd F P
ESB 346 9,15 1,93
5,89 ,003
ESJ 248 9,96 1,98
ESF 178 9,28 2,19
Total 772 9,60 2,02

4. Discussion and Conclusion
As suggested by Van Horn (2003), perceiving school climate as either a school-level or
individual-level property have implications for interventions to improve climate as well. If
climate is to be considered as a school-level construct, then the improvement efforts should
focus on the characteristics of the school that compose its climate. On the other hand, if climate
is an individual-level construct, then the interventions should focus on working together with
the different participants to change their perceptions of the school. The findings of this study
showed that in general, the three schools that operate under the same school chain have similar
results in the school environment factors with the perceptions of parents, teachers, and
students. At the school level, it could be said that the schools were able to create a similar
school climate, which is aimed by the higher level of management of the school chain. All three
of the schools should work on improving the factors related with Academic Satisfaction, because
this is a factor that showed significant differences in both teachers and students survey results.
There are some individual level differences, too, that each school can work on to improve. ESB
and ESF showed lower mean scores in the factor of Effective Communication. ESF is the school
that showed the lowest mean scores in the results of effective leadership qualities. School ESJ
appeared to be the school with the highest scores in the Effective Communication Factor.
Therefore it could be said that school principal and the leadership team in ESJ are effective in
creating effective communication channels with their stakeholders as well as assuring parent
and community involvement.
It could be thought in relation with results regarding Service Satisfaction that effective
communication and interaction on non-academic services has been maintained in all three
schools. This study did not examine the extent to which communication channels are created
among the three schools. Further studies could be conducted to investigate the methods used
to establish an effective communication culture at the schools.
Results regarding the principals effective communication skills were different in these three
schools. Perceptions of the teachers in two schools were determined to be higher than the
other school. Although each principal has his or her own personal traits as being leaders of their
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

318
own settings, the perceptions of the teachers, students and parents about them are significant.
This study did not examine the personal traits of the school principals as well as their academic
and administrative backgrounds. This finding could be explored in detail in further studies and
the notion of school climate could be investigated in line with the school leader's profile,
competency and the leadership style. This could be explored further in qualitative studies.
Identity factor was also found to be similar in the perceptions of teachers, students and
parents in all schools. Identity is an important phase in one's commitment to his or her school.
This study did not investigate the methods that have been used by the schools to create a
collaborative climate as well as enabling individuals identifying themselves with the institutional
missions and principals. Ethnographic studies could explore the strategies used both by the
headquarters as well as individual schools. This study is also based on a quantitative stance,
follow up studies could be pursued to examine the experiences and perspectives of teachers,
students and parents in an in-depth manner. Lived experiences and reflections could provide
unique insights to school administrators as well as teachers in ways if creating effective school
setting with a healthy climate.
Teachers' perceptions differed with regards to Academic Satisfaction Factor. It was found in
the study that teachers, who work at the elementary level of education, appeared to be
emphasizing academic targets more when compared to the teachers who work at
kindergartens. This finding could be interpreted with differing educational goals of elementary
schools and kindergarten. Higher academic achievements seem to be attached more importance
at elementary schools whereas social and emotional development of the children is a priority at
kindergartens.
It should also be noted that this study focused on private schools. The definition and
understanding if a school climate may vary from one school to another as well as from one
location to another. This study could be conducted in socio-economically disadvantaged
neighborhoods to examine the ways in which students, parents and teachers expectations and
perceptions vary. This study attempts to highlight how school climate is perceived by various
stakeholders within a group of chain schools. New insights could be developed and further
studies could be conducted through the findings of this study.

References

Anderson, C.S. (1982). The search for school climate: A review of the research. Review of Educational
Research, 52(3), 368-420.
Andrews, J.H.M. (1965). School organizational climate: Some validity studies. Canadian Education and
Research Digest, 5, 317-334.
Blum, R. (2007). Best practices: Building blocks for enhancing school environments. Johns Hopkins
Bloomberg School of Public Health: Baltimore.
Bozdoan, K., & Sanak, M. (2011). lkretim okulu mdrlerinin liderlik davranlar ile renme iklimi
arasndaki iliki. AB, Eitim Fakltesi Dergisi, 11(1), 137-145.
Bulach, C.R., Lunenburg, F.C., & Potter, L. (Eds.). (2008). Creating a culture for high performing schools: A
comprehensive approach to school reform and dropout prevention (First ed.). Lanham, Maryland:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Bulris, M.E. (2009). A Meta-Analysis of research on the mediated effects of principal leadership on student
achievement: Examining the effect size of school culture on student achievement as an indicator of
teacher effectiveness. Dissertation. East Carolina University. Retrieved from:
http://thescholarship.ecu.edu/handle/10342/2211/
Cohen, J., Pickeral, T., & McCloskey, M. (2009). Assessing school climate. Educational Digest, 45-48.
alk, T., Kurt, T., & alk, C. (2011). School climate in creating safe school: A conceptual analysis. Pegem
Eitim ve retim Dergisi, 1(4), 73-84.
Dinham, S., Cairney, T., Craigie, D., & Wilson, S. (1995). School climate and leadership: Research into three
secondary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 33(4), 36-58
Vatanartran, S. (2013). A Case Study: School Climate Results of a Private K-12 School Chain. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences.
8(3), 309-319.

319
Doan, S. (2012). Lise rencilerinin okul iklimi alglar. Adyaman niversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstits
Dergisi, 5(10), 55-92.
Dumay, X. (2009). Origins and consequences of schools' organizational culture for student achievement.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(4), 523-555.
Garland, R.B. (2004). Getting the ground ready to sow change: An ethnographic case study of Blewbury
Middle School. Unpublished Dissertation. North Carolina University, Raleigh. Retrieved from:
http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/4428
Halawah, I. (2005). The relationship between effective communication of high school principal and school
climate. Education, 126(2), 334-345.
James, I.R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology,
67, 279-229.
Khourey-Bowers, C., Dinko, R.L., & Hart, R.G. (2004). Influence of a shared leadership model in creating a
school culture of inquiry and collegiality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 3-24
Kreft, I.G.G. (1993). Using multilevel analyses to assess school effectiveness: A study of Dutch secondary
schools. Sociology of Education, 66, 104-129.
Lindell, M.K., & Brandt, C.J. (2000). Climate quality and climate consensus as mediators of the relationship
between organizational antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 331-348.
Loukas, A., & Robinson, S. (2004). Examining the moderating role of perceived school climate in early
adolescent adjustment. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14(2), 209-233.
Marshall, M.L. (n.d.). Examining school climate: Defining factors and educational influences. Center for
Research on School Safety, School Climate and Classroom Management, Georgia State University.
Retrievedfrom:
http://education.gsu.edu/schoolsafety/download%20files/wp%202002%20school%20climate.pdf
Memduholu, H.B., & eker, G. (2011). Organizational climate of primary schools in the view of teachers.
nn University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 12(1), 1-26.
Miller, S.I., & Fredericks, J. (1990). The false ontology of school climate effects. Educational Theory, 40(3),
333-342.
zdemir, S., Sezgin, F., irin, H., Karip, E., & Erkan, S. (2010). Examining the variables predicting primary
school students perceptions of school climate. Hacettepe niversitesi Eitim Fakltesi Dergisi, 38,
213-224.
Perkins, B.K. (2006). Where we learn: The Cube survey of urban school climate. Council of Urban Boards of
Education, National School Boards Association: New Haven.
Purkey, S.C., & Smith, M.S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. The Elementary School Journal, 83, 427-
452.
Rafferty, T.J. (2003). School climate and teacher attitudes toward upward communication in secondary
schools. American Secondary Education, 31(2), 49-70.
Reichers, A.E., & Schneider, B. (1990). Climate and culture. An evolution of constructs. In B. Schneider
(Ed.). Organizational climate and culture (pp. 5-39). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Roeser, R.W., Eccles, J.D., & Sameroff, A.J. (1998). Academic and emotional functioning in early
adolescence: Longitudinal relations, patterns, and prediction by experience in middle school.
Development and Psychopathology, 10, 321-352.
Sahin, A.E. (2008). A qualitative assessment of the quality of Turkish elementary schools. Eurasian Journal
of Educational Research, 30, 117-139
Schein, E.H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sirin, S. (2012). Development and validation of a school climate scale in Turkey. Unpublished manuscript.
New York University.
Tableman, B. (2004). School climate and learning. Best practice briefs, Michigan State University: Michigan
Thompson, G. (2008). The school climate program: The relationship of a rewards and consequences
program to school climate in an urban middle school. Teachers Network Leadership Institute.
Van Horn, M.L. (2003). Assessing the unit of measurement for school climate through psychometric and
outcome analyses of the school climate survey. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63,
1002-1019.
Watkins, M.A. (2012). The impact of school culture and climate on student performance. Unpublished
PhD dissertation. Purdue University. Indiana. Retrieved from
http://www.purdue.edu/policies/pages/teach_res_outreach/c_22.html