Asia Pacific Educ. Rev.
(2011) 12:319–328
DOI 10.1007/s12564-011-9146-0
Teacher perceptions of school culture and their organizational
commitment and well-being in a Chinese school
Chang Zhu • Geert Devos • Yifei Li
Received: 1 July 2010 / Revised: 20 December 2010 / Accepted: 7 January 2011 / Published online: 19 January 2011
 Education Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea 2011
Abstract This study aims to analyze and validate the
dimensions and specific features of a school culture in a
Chinese context. A sample of 181 teachers from a Chinese
primary and secondary school in Beijing participated in a
survey that measures school organizational cultural char-
acteristics and teacher organizational commitment and
well-being as outcomes of school culture. Specific cultural
characteristics of this school and their impact on teacher
organizational commitment and well-being were identified.
The findings provide important information for under-
standing a school culture in the Chinese context. It enriches
the theory related to school culture and the research find-
ings that have been identified in the Western settings.
Keywords School culture
Goal orientation

Innovation
Organizational commitment

Teacher well-being
Chinese context
Introduction
In the current knowledge and digital society, we are facing
rapid social, technological, and economic changes. In order
to meet the changes of the society, educational change and
innovation is critical for all educational institutions.
C. Zhu (&)
Department of Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel,
Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
e-mail: chang.zhu@vub.ac.be
G. Devos
Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Y. Li
Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
Among the factors that affect educational change and
innovation, school culture is a very important factor that
affects the changing process of educational innovations.
Previous research has pointed out that characteristics of
school culture affect how school can work toward positive
change (Goldring 2002), as school culture is a holistic
entity that influences everyone within a school (Seashore
2009). School culture is considered as an important char-
acteristic that influences teachers’ behavior and teacher’s
attitudes (e.g. Hopkins 2001; Seashore 2009). These atti-
tudes are crucial for innovation, school improvement
(Kruse and Seashore Louise 2009), and student achieve-
ment (Krüger et al. 2007). Therefore, constructing a sound
school culture has become a goal for education moderni-
zation and reform. Although the literature on school culture
in Western countries is vast, the number of empirical
studies in non-Western countries is limited. Therefore, this
study aims to analyze and understand school cultural
characteristics, the dimensions, and specific features of
school culture in a Chinese context. A second aim of the
study is to verify whether school culture is related to
teachers’ organizational commitment and well-being as
suggested by studies in Western settings (Shaw and Reyes
1992; Rashid, Sambasivan and Johari 2003). The latter
two variables are considered as important predictors of
organizational effectiveness and improvement (Shann
1998; Dee et al. 2006; Ostroff 1992).
First of all, we introduce a few words about the use of
the term school culture. In contemporary literature in this
field, the terms school culture and school climate have
quite often been used and many authors have referred them
to be similar in many ways (Freiberg and Stein 1999; Hoy
et al. 1991; Maslowski 2006; Owens 2001). Some
researchers have argued about the differences and the
levels of reference between the two terms (Van Houtte
123
320
2005; Schoen and Teddlie 2008); however, these scholars
seem to agree to the use of the concept of school culture as
it influences the individual members of a school. In this
study, we opt to use the term school culture and we start
with an introduction of conceptions of culture and school
culture.
Conception of culture
‘‘Culture’’ is multifaceted, largely implicit, and often
interpreted with different meanings. According to recent
studies of Bodley (1994), Douglas (1992) and Geertz
(1993), culture refers to a shared, learned, symbolic system
of values, beliefs, and attitudes that shapes and influences
perception and behavior. It is ‘‘a historically transmitted
pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, and a system
of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms’’
(Geertz 1993). Those patterns of meaning are expressed
both explicitly through symbols and implicitly in our
taken-for-granted beliefs. Berry et al. (1992) refer to cul-
ture as ‘‘the shared way of life of a group of people’’.
Culture influences people’s social behaviors and interests,
and the way they interact with others. While cultural fac-
tors are typically represented by values, assumptions,
expectations, etc. (Smircich 1983), the variance and
invariance of human behavior and mental processes under
diverse cultural conditions are both objects of cultural
studies and they form the collective property of a group
(Bodley 1994; Ho and Wu 2001, p. 4).
School culture
School culture is a concept that is situated in organizational
culture, but more specifically about schools. Organizational
culture refers to the taken-for-granted values, the under-
lying assumptions, and expectations present in the orga-
nization (Cameron and Quinn 1999; Louis 1985; Schein
2004). School culture refers to the way people perceive,
think, and feel about things of a school (Erickson 1987). It
is regarded as a holistic entity that pervades and influences
everyone within a school (Hargreaves 1995; Maslowski
2001, pp. 8–9; Stoll and Fink 1995). It is ‘‘the way we do
things around here’’ and often defined as ‘the basic
assumptions, norms and values and cultural artifacts of a
school that are shared by school members, which influence
their functioning at the school (Maslowski 2001). School
culture manifests itself in rituals, customs, stories, ways of
treating each other, and culture’s artefacts such as language
(Stoll 1999; Hoy et al. 1991).
School culture is closely related to the healthy and
sustainable development of a school, the development and
well-being of the school members, and objectives of the
school and education. An important dimension of school
123
C. Zhu et al.
culture is the multiple interactions among groups and
individuals. Prosser (1999) points out that school culture is
‘‘not only the particular patterns of perception and
behavior, but also the system of relationships between
those relationships.’’ Hargreaves (1995) indicates that
teachers are more encouraged to experiment in their
classrooms and collaborate with colleagues in a school
culture that enables and encourages innovation for more
effective teaching and learning.
Theoretical base and key characteristics of school
culture
It is clear that school culture is a multifaceted concept,
composed of different dimensions (Devos et al. 2007;
Engels et al. 2008; Maslowski 2001; Kruse and Seashore
Louise 2009; Staessens 1990). A positive or ‘‘good’’ school
culture is often considered as one in which meaningful staff
development and enhanced student learning are practised
(Engels et al. 2008). Recent research identifies common
features of school cultures in which professional learning
and commitment to enhance student learning are valued,
such as a shared sense of purposes and values, norms of
continuous learning and improvement, collaborative col-
legial relationships and opportunities for collective prob-
lem solving and sharing experiences (Fullan 2001; Deal
and Peterson 1999). More specifically, the following
characteristics of school culture have been stressed or put
forth in the literature.
Main factors identified in the Western context: goal
orientation, leadership, participative decision-making,
formal and informal relations among teachers,
and innovation orientation
Earlier studies have defined some key factors to be
important for school culture. Goal orientations (Staessens
1990) refer to the extent to which the school vision is
clearly formulated and shared by the team members.
Leadership behavior (Hoy and Tarter 1997) examines the
extent to which teachers perceive the principal as some-
body who makes clear what is expected of teachers and
who organizes the school activities in a structured way.
Participative decision-making (Devos et al. 2007) defines
the extent to which teachers participate in decision-making
at school. Participative decision-making plays a vital role
in establishing an atmosphere conducive to innovation. It
can enable and empower staff at all levels, support team
spirit, and create a shared responsibility for innovation
(Alvesson 2002; Scrimshaw 2004). Formal and informal
relations among teachers and staff (Staessens 1990;
Hoy and Tarter 1997) examine professional and non-
professional ties among teachers, including opportunities
Teacher perceptions of school culture
for collective problem solving and sharing experiences
(Fullan and Stiegelbauer 1991; Deal and Peterson 1999).
Innovation orientation (Maslowski 2001) refers to the
extent to which school members have an open attitude
toward change. Innovation is the application of new
resources, approaches, or beliefs that changes the social
practices. Within education, this can be the application of a
new approach to teaching and learning, the use of a new
digital tool or new material—which brings about some
value by altering the social practice of teaching and
learning. Innovation in schools works best when it is a
continuous process that relies on the involvement of staff at
all levels of the institution. Building a culture of transfor-
mative innovation requires significant hard work, team
building, and leadership (Farrel 2000). A strong and
moving school culture is characterized by a strong unity in
vision, a strong involvement of team members in decision-
making, and strong professional and non-professional ties
among the teachers (Lieberman 2005).
A new dimension: shared vision
Shared vision is a concept that is relatively less studied in
the literature. It is related to goal orientation; however, it
has a stronger stress on the shared meaning developed by
the school members and/or through the history of the
school. It depicts a powerful picture for the future gener-
ated by all members. It offers staff members direction and
purpose for their work (DuFour and Berkey 1995). It cre-
ates the environment and the relationships shared by
members. A shared vision can also increase the flexibility
necessary for change and overcoming resistance to change
(Peterson et al. 1996).
Shared perceptions of the aims and requirements of an
innovation are important aspects of innovation in educa-
tion. It is important to encourage different players, espe-
cially leaders and practitioners to communicate the
perceived needs for the success of an innovation. From a
resource and practice perspective, it is important to create a
shared understanding of the aims of the innovation between
the leaders and teachers: the creation of a shared vision
(Kenny 2003). Communicating a shared vision from a
national and local perspective is also important for sup-
porting nationally driven innovative initiatives across
schools. The clarity and consistency of vision from the
macrolayer also has implications for the innovations
undertaken within the meso- and microlayers (Groff and
Mouza 2008). A shared vision for an innovation provides a
crucial clarity of purpose and direction for those managing
innovations. Co-constructing this shared vision engenders a
sense of ownership and understanding for all individuals
engaging in innovations which can support wider innova-
tive practices. Effectively managing school change requires
321
a shared understanding of the school as a whole and a
shared vision of all school members.
In recent years, construction of school culture has been
recognized as an important concept by Chinese scholars to
understand and diagnose the current situation of a school
organizational culture and to solve existing problems.
Recent studies reveal that lack of cohesion, conservatism,
and anxiety of teachers about unsound interpersonal rela-
tionships are existing problems among others for some
schools (Xi 2007). Furthermore, reconstructing or reshap-
ing school culture is also regarded as significant for
transforming school administration and promoting educa-
tion curriculum reform and educational innovation.
Research on school culture in the Chinese context
Culture and school culture are studied in different manners
in the Chinese context. However, the majority of research
cluster culture in three levels, namely the ideology level
(value, ways of thinking, beliefs, etc.), the (assumed)
behavior level (behavior code, ethics, customs, public
opinion, etc.), and the material level (clothing, architecture,
physical environment, etc.). These conceptions are in line
with the Western approach, although the latter more often
focuses on the first two levels of meaning as presented
above. Jiang and Zhao (2000) state that school organiza-
tional culture includes both explicit (e.g. physical, behav-
ior, languages) and implicit features (e.g. norms, values,
beliefs, basic assumptions) of a school, with the implicit
culture playing a decisive role in school organizational
culture. Shared value is often considered as a core element
in school culture.
Teacher organizational commitment and well-being
Organizational commitment is defined as the relative
strength of an individual’s identification with and
involvement in an organization (Steers 1977, p. 46). It is
characterized by a strong belief in and acceptance of the
organization’s goals and values, willingness to exert con-
siderable effort on behalf of the organization, and a strong
desire to remain with the organization (Mowday et al.
1979). Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) defined commitment
as the incentive that sustains a line of behavior toward one
or more objectives. Organizational commitment is imper-
ative to the effective functioning of the workplace (Meyer
et al. 2002). Organizational commitment reflects a sense of
belonging, fidelity, and adherence between an individual
and an organization and makes the individuals gather round
a common value, aim, and culture of the organization.
Existing theoretical and empirical studies demonstrate that
commitment has direct implications on individuals and an
overall influence on organizations (e.g. Herscovitch and
123
322
Meyer 2002). There is evidence that stronger organiza-
tional commitment is associated with higher productivity
and more willingness to assume larger responsibilities;
however, weaker organizational commitment often points
to lower productivity, occupation flow out, absence and
poor performance (e.g. Ward and Davis 1995). Organiza-
tional commitment is closely related to organizational
culture. Collective organizational commitment also reflects
the levels of commitment of school members toward a
school.
Earlier studies define teacher well-being as ‘‘a positive
emotional state that is the result of a harmony between the
sum of specific context factors on the one hand and the
personal needs and expectations toward the school on the
other hand’’ (Aelterman et al. 2002; Engels et al. 2004).
The affective domain is regarded as an important factor in
teacher well-being in a school system (Van Petegem et al.
2005). Deal (1985) suggests that the shared culture among
school members helps to create solidarity and meaning and
inspire commitment and productivity of teachers. Organi-
zational commitment of teachers and teacher well-being
are often considered as outcomes of a school culture
(Aelterman et al. 2002).
Relationship between school culture and teacher
organizational commitment and well-being
The perception of school culture by teachers plays a great
role in teachers’ organizational commitment. Previous
research (e.g. Lok and Crawford 1999) emphasized the
significant effect organizational culture may have on per-
formance and commitment in organizations. In the litera-
ture, it is identified that there is a strong relationship
between leadership behaviors of school principals and
organizational commitment of teachers (e.g. Sinden et al.
2004). School goal orientation is suggested as an important
factor that influences the organizational commitment of
employees (Lee et al. 2010). Relations among teachers,
especially collaborative relations, are also a topic that some
researchers have been investigating, which influence
teachers’ organizational commitment and well-being
(Paine and Ma 1993). Shared vision seems to be a less
studied concept in the school contexts; however, research
in other fields, for example business management, has
shown that shared vision plays a vital role in bringing the
members together and thus the commitment and well-being
of the organizational members (Li 2005). The shared val-
ues, norms, and beliefs among school members can enable
teachers to be more committed to the development of the
school. Recent studies have stressed that a supportive
school culture is critical for teacher well-being (Aelterman
et al. 2007).
123
C. Zhu et al.
In summary, in this research, we examine the teacher
perceived characteristics of a school culture and the impact
of school culture on teacher organizational commitment
and well-being.
Research questions
As presented earlier, culture is defined as the set of shared
meanings, shared beliefs, and shared assumptions of the
members of the organization. In fact, culture can be
examined at different levels of abstraction. Normally, to
obtain a characteristic at the organization level, individual
perceptions need to be aggregated (Jones and James 1979).
Based on the theoretical base and the key factors as
presented above, this study focuses on the following
research questions:
1. Can the scales reflecting school culture be validated in
a Chinese context?
2. What are the important features reflecting a school
culture in a Chinese context?
3. What are the impacts of the school culture on teacher
commitment and well-being?
Method
Setting
The Chinese school under this study is a leading experi-
mental school (primary and secondary) in Beijing. It was
established in 1960 with a history of 50 years. Currently,
the school faces a challenging task to reflect on its last
50 years of development, to diagnose the current school
culture, and to design a comprehensive school culture
(re)construction plan for its future. The reconstructing and
reshaping of school culture is regarded as an important
means to solve existing problems at the schools, to trans-
form school administration, and to promote basic education
curriculum reform and new experiment of teaching and
learning. The current study was designed as part of the
school culture diagnosis process and serves as a basis for
developing the school reconstruction plan.
Instruments
Based on the available measurements from literature, we
adapted and applied the following nine scales in this study
to examine school culture, teacher organizational com-
mitment, and well-being. More specifically, the nine scales
are as follows:
Teacher perceptions of school culture
• School goal orientations (GO) (adapted/based on
Staessens 1990)
• Leadership behavior (LS) (adapted/based on Hoy and
Tarter 1997)
• Teacher participation in decision-making (PD)
(adapted/based on Devos et al. 2002)
• Innovation orientation (IO) (adapted/based on Maslowski
2001)
• Formal relations and collaboration among teachers
(FR) (adapted/based on Staessens 1990)
• Informal relations among teachers (IR) (adapted/based
on Hoy and Tarter 1997)
• Shared vision of school value (SV) (self-developed, an
example item is ‘‘I share the vision and educational
concepts of our school and apply them to my own
work’’.)
• Organizational commitment of teachers (OC) (adapted/
based on Mowday et al. 1979)
• Teacher well-being (WB) (adapted/based on Aelterman
et al. 2002)
Each of the nine scales is composed of five items of
questions. The 45-item questionnaire was first tested with a
pilot sample of 30 teachers from a Chinese school. Most
items from existing questionnaires were proven to be valid
based on the feedback from the Chinese researchers and the
teachers in the pilot study. Small adaptations were made to
be suitable for the research context. The final questionnaire
was delivered to teachers from the school for the current
study. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to
which the statements characterize their school (the norms,
characteristics, and practices of the school) on a 5-point
Likert-type scale (1 = completely not true or strongly
disagree; 5 = very true or strongly agree).
Participants and data collection
Questionnaires were delivered to about 220 staff from the
school under this study. The collected questionnaires were
192, with a response rate of 87%. However, 11 ques-
tionnaires were considered invalid (with more than 5
missing values or with clear flaws). Questionnaires with
less than 5 missing values were replaced with the medium
value. This resulted in 181 valid questionnaires, with a
valid response rate of 82%. Among them, 71 of them were
primary teachers, 90 of them were secondary teachers, and
20 were teachers with administrative roles in the mean-
time. The teachers were from all grades (primary school
grade 1–6 and secondary school grade 7–12) and a wide
range of teaching subjects including Chinese language,
English language, mathematics, biology, chemistry,
physics, geology, history, politics, ethics, IT, art, music,
and sports.
323
Data analysis
Responses of all teachers were input into SPSS datasets.
First of all, the descriptive demographic features of the
respondents and data normal distribution were analyzed. In
order to validate the scales, reliability analysis was applied.
Relational analyses using AMOS were conducted taking
teacher organizational commitment and well-being as
dependent variables.
Results
Descriptive results
The demographic features of the respondents were ana-
lyzed. Seventy percent of the respondents were women and
30% were men. The average age of the whole group was
37 years, with the average of female staff slightly older
than the male staff. The average teaching years of all
teachers were 12 years, and the female teachers had an
average experience of 13 years, while the male teachers
had an average experience of 9.7 years (Table 1). As part
of the descriptive analysis, test of normality was conducted
using Shapiro–Wilk tests and the QQ-plots. For all nine
scales, the normal distribution of data was confirmed.
Reliability of the scales in the Chinese context
The reliability of eight scales was good and acceptable with
a Cronbach’s a value between .70 and .85 (Table 2).
However, the reliability of one scale, informal relations
among teachers, was lower than .60. Therefore, the scale of
informal relations was not included in the follow-up con-
firmatory factor analysis, the regression analysis, and the
path analysis; however, it was retained for the descriptive
analysis, which could give some indication of information
(e.g. the mean score) related to this scale. And we bear in
mind that the results related to this scale should be treated
with caution. In addition, principal component analysis was
conducted for the factor of ‘‘shared vision’’ as it is a newly
developed scale. The scale structure was confirmed and the
factor loadings of the five items were from .57 to .81.
Table 1 Demographic features of respondents from the case study
school
Women Men Total
No. (N) 127 54 181
Average age 38 36 37
Average teaching years 13 9.7 12
123
324 C. Zhu et al.

Table 2 Features of the school

Scale Reliability Agg. score SD
culture, teacher organizational
(Cronbach‘s a) M (N=181)
commitment, and well-being
reflected at the case study Goal orientation .81 21.84 2.42
school
Participation in decision-making .84 19.39 3.46
Leadership .70 19.41 2.49
Shared vision .85 20.04 2.90
Innovation orientation .74 21.60 2.53
Formal relations—collaboration .84 21.80 2.56
Informal relations .57 19.01 2.62
Organizational commitment .81 20.81 2.76
Teacher well-being .83 20.95 3.10

Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted and the six- Table 3 The regression analysis results of school culture on teacher
factor model of school cultural dimensions showed an organizational commitment and well-being
acceptable model fit (GFI = .93, CFI = .90, RMSEA = School culture Teacher organizational Teacher well-being
.06, X2/df = 2.07). Although the CFI does not reach the .95 features commitment (OC) (WB)
standard (Tabachnick and Fidell 2007), considering the
Goal orientation .41*** .23**
four indices (GFI, CFI, RMSEA, and X2/df) together, the
Leadership .19* .01
factor model can be regarded as acceptable. In addition, an
Participation in .15 .13
earlier criterion shows that a good fit for CFA is indicated decision-making
by an RMSEA \.06, CFI and NNFI [.90 (Hu and Bentler Innovation orientation .13 .16
1999). However, future studies will be necessary to further Shared vision .21* .39***
refine the instruments and re-test this model. Formal relations— .09 .30***
collaboration
Features of school culture in a Chinese school
Cell represents standardized regression coefficients
and the mean scores of teacher organizational
* p \ .05, ** p \ .01, *** p \ .001
commitment and well-being

The aggregated score mean and standard deviation of the
dimensions of school culture and teacher organizational
commitment and well-being were summarized in Table 2.
The results show that the Chinese school in this study
features a rather high goal orientation, innovation orienta-
tion, and formal relations among teachers (aggregated mean
[21); a moderate high shared vision, teacher organiza-
tional commitment and well-being (aggregated mean
between 20 and 21); and a relatively lower participation in
decision-making, leadership, and informal relations among
staff (aggregate mean between 19 and 20).
The impact of school culture on teacher organizational
commitment and well-being
In order to analyze the impact of school culture charac-
teristics on teacher organizational commitment and well-
being, we conducted a structural relational analysis using
AMOS 18.0.
An initial path analysis was conducted taking six factors
as independent factors, namely GO, LS, PD, IO, SV, and
FR, and two factors as dependent factors, namely OC
and WB. This initial model showed an acceptable fit
(GFI = .97, RMSEA = .07, X2/df = 2.03). However, we
analyzed the condition index in this relational model with
multiple independent variables. The results showed that the
condition index in this model was relatively high (condi-
tion index = 30). In order to reduce the effects of multi-
collinearity and have a more accurate understanding of the
interrelationships, we re-tested the structural model based
on various regression analysis results. In addition, multiple
regression results indicate that goal orientation, leadership,
and shared vision are the most important variables that are
related to teacher organizational commitment. GO, LS, and
SV contributed to 67% of teacher organizational commit-
ment (R2 = .67), and GO, LS, SV, and PD together con-
tributed to 69% of teacher organizational commitment
(R2 = .69). The results indicate that school goal orienta-
tion, shared vision, and formal relations among teachers
are significantly positively related to teacher well-being.
Regarding the effects on teacher well-being, GO, SV, and
FR contributed to 68% of teacher well-being (R2 = .68).
The results of the multiple linear regression analyses are
reported in Table 3.
Based on the regression results, several other structural
model analyses were tested taking the most significant

123
Teacher perceptions of school culture
GO
,41
,32
,23 OC
,71 LS ,19
,75 ,36
,21
WB
,35 SV ,39
.61
,30
FR
Fig. 1 Relational model between school culture features and teacher
organizational commitment and well-being. GO goal orientation, LS
leadership, SV shared vision, FR formal relations, OC organizational
commitment, WB well-being
interrelationships between the school cultural variables and
teacher organizational commitment and well-being. Fig-
ure 1 presents the best fitting model with satisfactory
goodness-of-fit indexes and an acceptable condition
index (X2/df \ 2, GFI = .96, RMSEA = .037, condition
index = 14). Based on the recommendation of Belsley
et al. (1980), a condition index greater than 30 (conserva-
tive approach) or 50 indicates significant multicollinearity
and less than 15 is at an acceptable level. The significant
standardized coefficients are presented in the final path
model.
Discussion
The findings of this research provide important information
for analyzing and understanding school culture and teacher
organizational commitment and well-being. It enriches the
theory related to school culture and the research findings
that have been identified in the Western settings. More
specifically, the present study contributes to the literature
of school culture and school administration in the follow-
ing three aspects.
Firstly, the important dimensions of school culture as
defined or based in the relevant literature were validated in
this study. This contributes significantly to the school
culture research as other researchers (Rousseau 1990;
Maslowski 2006) point out that the validation of school
culture questionnaires is very necessary for a wider appli-
cation of these inventories in other educational contexts
and systems as they have been often limited to the coun-
tries in which they were developed. During the research
design, we consulted Chinese researchers to verify whether
the selected dimensions based on Western empirical stud-
ies were relevant for the Chinese context. The results in
this specific context reveal that it is also important to
view school culture in these dimensions as identified in
Western contexts, including goal orientation, leadership,
325
participative decision-making, and innovation orientation.
Furthermore, a new dimension, shared vision, was sug-
gested to be typical in the Chinese context, as in a ‘‘col-
lectivist culture’’ (Bond 1996) the recognition of the
collective vision is considered an important component.
This study tested and verified it as an important factor in
school culture. This concept has been raised in recent
studies that identify the importance of a shared sense of
purposes and values (e.g. Fullan 2001).
It has to be noted that the dimension informal relations
was a weak one, at least for the sample in this study.
Nevertheless, the present study confirms that leadership is
a very important dimension of school culture as identified
in previous studies (Deal and Peterson 1990), and school
leaders need to play an important role in transforming or
reshaping school culture in order to ensure in an efficient
way that it is supportive and motivating for teacher pro-
fessional development and student learning (Fullan 2007;
Leithwood and Louis 2002).
Secondly, this study revealed some specific features of
school culture of a Chinese school. In general, the school
features a rather high goal orientation, innovativeness, and
formal relations among teachers. The teachers reported a
relatively higher score for shared vision, organizational
commitment, and well-being at this school; however, the
scores for teacher participation in decision-making and
informal relations among teachers were relatively lower.
The latter is not uncommon given the current problems
existing in Chinese schools such as unsound personal
relationships among teachers due to high work load,
stringent administration, social and economic pressure, etc.
The results seem to suggest that the culture at this school is
not optimally supportive, as previous studies point out that
a supportive school culture is considered as one in which
higher level of support is practised (Dalin 1998; Dalin et al.
1993).
Thirdly, the impacts of school culture on teacher orga-
nizational commitment and well-being were analyzed. The
results indicate that three main factors, namely goal ori-
entation, leadership, and shared vision, affect teacher
organizational commitment to a large degree. In other
words, the more a school has clear goals, stronger leader-
ship, and shared vision within the school, the more likely
the teachers are to be committed to the school. As identi-
fied in this study, leadership plays a very important role
shaping the school culture and influencing teacher organi-
zational commitment and well-being. Therefore, school
principals play an important role in influencing the quality
of school culture and through it on teachers’ performances.
This result supports previous studies that leadership has a
significant impact on teachers’ engagement and commit-
ment (Seashore 2009). As for teacher well-being, the study
found out that teachers feel more attached to a school in a
123
326
school culture that features clear goal orientation, positive
formal relations, and shared vision. The results are con-
sistent with other findings that suggest the presence of a
clear goal and shared vision promote increased teacher
involvement and commitment (Cheng 1993). Furthermore,
the findings confirm that positive collegial relationships are
very important as a healthy school culture should be built
upon a collaborative activity among teachers, students,
parents, staff, and the school leaders (Fullan 1992). An
effective approach for change in school culture is to create
a shared vision that allows for collaborative school cultures
(Stolp and Stuart 1994). The relational model as depicted
in Fig. 1 supports the argument of Solvason (2005) that
school culture is multifaceted and successful school lies in
the notion that it should ‘‘get the right mix at the right
time’’.
It is important to point out the new cultural dimension
‘‘shared vision’’ identified in the Chinese context was
confirmed to be an important factor that influences both
teacher organizational commitment and well-being.
Therefore, this study not only tests the theories in relation
to school culture in a non-Western context, but also con-
tributes to theories in this domain by validating a new
dimension that could be important to be considered in
future studies.
To transform or to re-construct a school culture is an
important goal and step for school development and edu-
cational change. This requires flexibility and efforts to gain
commitment and participation from teachers and school
leaders in order to shape a culture in which they are
committed to the mission of the school and prepared to
work to achieve the shared goals. Is a school culture
innovative, dynamic, and open to encourage and support
new ideas and practices? This is very critical for all edu-
cational institutions to meet the new demands and prepare
students for the changing society. As Prosser (1999) states,
school culture influences everyone within a school; there-
fore, shaping a positive and supportive school culture is
both an aim and a means for school development.
Conclusion, limitations, and implications
The results suggest that the Chinese school under this study
features a clear goal orientation, a rather open attitude
toward innovation, a sound formal collegial relationship,
and moderately a good sense of shared vision. We also
found that teachers in this school reported a relatively
sound organizational commitment and well-being in this
school environment. However, improvements are espe-
cially necessary in the dimensions of teacher participation
in decision-making, leadership and most importantly the
informal relations among teachers. As to the impact of
123
C. Zhu et al.
school cultural characteristics on teacher organizational
commitment and well-being, this study identifies that tea-
cher perceptions of school goal orientation, leadership, and
shared vision are the most significant factors influencing
teacher organizational commitment; teacher perceptions of
school goal orientation, shared vision, and formal relations
among staff are the most significant factors influencing
teacher well-being.
We note that this study has a couple of limitations. This
research only examines teachers in one school. The results
identified in this study could only be applicable to Chinese
schools in similar settings and contexts. The current find-
ings may not be able to explain the situations in other types
of schools or school settings. Further studies are needed in
order to understand school cultural characteristics and
teacher organizational commitment and well-being in other
settings in a more comprehensive way. In addition, this
research was based on quantitative data from teachers. This
implies that it may not be able to capture the actual rich-
ness and complexity of the school cultural characteristics.
Further studies should consider a more comprehensive
design. Furthermore, the role and perceptions of other
school actors such as principals and students should be
taken into account in future studies in order to achieve a
deeper understanding of school features and the impact of
school culture on teacher commitment and well-being, and
student engagement and achievement.
This research is a pilot study to understand school cul-
ture and can serve as a basis for continuing studies in this
filed. Furthermore, this study enriches the theory related to
school culture that has been applied in Western settings and
provides empirical evidence from a Chinese setting.
Although the sample size in this study is limited, the
adapted and validated instruments can be a useful basis for
future research in this area. Future studies should involve
more schools in different regions to deepen our knowledge
about school culture in the Chinese context. In addition,
follow-up studies involving a large number of schools will
be helpful to examine whether the relationships at the
individual level hold up at the school level. Furthermore,
cross-cultural studies involving both Western and Chinese
schools will be very valuable to examine the characteristics
of school culture from an international perspective and to
share the experiences and knowledge in an international
arena. Another important direction for future research is the
interrelationship between school culture and educational
innovations in order to meet the demands of the rapid
societal, technological, and economic changes, and the
effects of school culture on development of school learning
communities and improvement of student achievement. By
deepening our understanding of school culture, school
leaders and other relevant players can be better equipped
to shape the values, beliefs, and attitudes necessary to
Teacher perceptions of school culture
promote a positive and nurturing school environment for
teacher well-being and student learning.
References
Aelterman, A., Engels, N., Van Petegem, K., & Verhaeghe, J. P.
(2007). The well-being of teachers in Flanders: The importance
of a supportive school culture. Educational Studies, 3(33),
285–298.
Aelterman, A., Engels, N., Verhaeghe, J. P., Sys, H., Van Petegem,
K., & Panagiotou, K. (2002). Development of an instrument to
measure well-being among primary and secondary school
teachers. Report for Flemish department of education.
Alvesson, M. (2002). Understanding organizational culture. London:
Sage.
Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression
diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collin-
earity. New York: Wiley.
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (1992).
Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bodley, J. H. (1994). Cultural anthropology: Tribes, states, and the
global system. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Pub. Co.
Bond, M. H. (1996). The handbook of Chinese psychology. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Cameron, K., & Quinn, R. (1999). Diagnosing and changing
organizational culture. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Cheng, Y. C. (1993). Profiles of organizational culture and effective
schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 4(2),
85–110.
Dalin, P. (1998). School development—theories and strategies.
London: Continuum.
Dalin, P., Rolff, H. G., & Kleekamp, B. (1993). Changing the school
culture. London: Cassell.
Deal, T. E. (1985). Cultural change: Opportunity, silent killer, or
metamorphosis? In R. H. Kilman, M. J., Saxton, & R. Serpa
(Eds)., Gaining control of the corporate culture (pp. 292–331).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Deal, T., & Peterson, K. (1990). The principal’s role in shaping
school culture. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research
and Improvement.
Deal, T., & Peterson, K. (1999). Shaping school culture. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Singleton, C. A. (2006). Organizational
commitment of teachers in urban schools: Examining the effects
of team structures. Urban Education, 41, 603–627.
Devos, G., & Vanderheyden, K. (2002). Attracting, developing and
retaining effective teachers: Background report for flanders.
Thematic Review. OECD.
Devos, G., Bouckenooghe, D., Engels, N., Hotton, G., & Aelterman,
A. (2007). An assessment of well-being of principals in Flemish
primary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 45(1),
33–61.
Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory.
London: Routledge.
DuFour, R., & Berkey, T. (1995). The principal as staff developer.
Journal of Staff Development, 16(4), 2–6.
Engels, N., Aelterman, A., Van Petegem, K., & Schepens, A. (2004).
Factors which influence the well-being of pupils in Flemish
secondary schools. Educational Studies, 30(2), 127–143.
Engels, N., Hotton, G., Devos, G., Bouckenooghe, D., & Aelterman,
A. (2008). Principals in schools with a positive school culture.
Educational Studies, 34(3), 159–174.
327
Erickson, F. (1987). Conceptions of school culture: An overview.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 23(4), 11–24.
Farrel, J. P. (2000). Why is educational reform so difficult? Similar
descriptions, different prescriptions, failed explanations. Curric-
ulum Inquiry, 30(1), 83–103.
Freiberg, J., & Stein, T. A. (1999). Measuring, improving, and
sustaining healthy learning environments. In J. Freiberg (Ed.),
School climate (pp. 11–29). London: Falmer.
Fullan, M. (1992). Visions that blind. Educational Leadership, 49(5),
19–22.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. CA: Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco.
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of
educational change. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Geertz, C. (1993). The interpretation of cultures. London: Fontana
Press.
Goldring, L. M. (2002). Forging connections: A study to explore the
relationship between school culture and student achievement for
select high-performing, high-minority, high-poverty high
schools in northern and central California. ULV.
Groff, J., & Mouza, C. (2008). A framework for addressing
challenges to classroom technology use. AACE Journal, 16(1),
21–46.
Hargreaves, D. (1995). School culture, school effectiveness and
school improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improve-
ment, 6(1), 23–46.
Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organiza-
tional change: Extension of a three component model. The
Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 474–487.
Ho, D. Y. F., & Wu, M. (2001). Introduction to cross-cultural
psychology. In L. L. Adler & U. P. Gielen (Eds.), Cross-cultural
topics in psychology (pp. 3–13). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Hopkins, D. (2001). School improvement for real. London: Routl-
edge-Falmer.
Hoy, W. K., & Tarter, C. J. (1997). The road to open and healthy
schools: A handbook for change, elementary edition. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Kottkamp, R. B. (1991). Open schools/
healthy schools: Measuring organizational climate. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in
covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new
alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.
Jiang, Y.S. & Zhao, M. (2000). School administration. Guangdong
Higher Education Publishing.
Jones, A. P., & James, L. R. (1979). Psychological climate:
Dimensions and relationships of individual and aggregated work
environment perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 23, 201–250.
Kenny, J. (2003). A research-based model for managing strategic
education change and innovation projects. Research and Devel-
opment in Higher Education, 26, 333–342.
Krüger, M. L., Witziers, B., & Sleegers, P. (2007). The impact of
school leadership on school level factors: Validation of a causal
model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18, 1–20.
Kruse, S. D., & Seashore Louise, K. (2009). Building strong school
cultures: A guide to leading change. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Lee, O. F., Tan, J. A., & Javalgi, R. (2010). Goal orientation and
organizational commitment: Individual difference predictors of
job performance. International Journal of Organizational Anal-
ysis, 18(1), 129–150.
Leithwood, K., & Louis, K. S. (2002). Organizational learning in
schools. Lisse, NL: Swets and Zeitlinger.
123
328
Li, L. (2005). The effects of trust and shared vision on inward
knowledge transfer in subsidiaries’ intra- and inter-organiza-
tional relationships. International Business Review, 14(1),
77–95.
Lieberman, A. (2005). The roots of educational change. Berlin:
Springer.
Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (1999). The relationship between commit-
ment and organizational culture, subculture, leadership style and
job satisfaction in organizational change and development.
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 20(7),
365–373.
Louis, M. (1985). An investigator’s guide to workplace culture. In P.
Frost, L. Moore, M. Louis, C. Lundberg, & J. Martin (Eds.),
Organizational culture (pp. 73–98). California: Sage Publications.
Maslowski, R. (2001). School culture and school performance: An
explorative study into the organizational culture of secondary
schools and their effects. Twente: Twente University Press.
Maslowski, R. (2006). A review of inventories for diagnosing school
culture. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(1), 6–35.
Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the
workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Manage-
ment Review, 11(3), 299–326.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L.
(2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to
the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and
consequences. Journal of vocational behavior, 61(1), 20–52.
Mowday, R., Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of
organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14,
224–247.
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes,
and performance: An organizational level of analysis. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 77, 963–974.
Owens, R. G. (2001). Organizational behavior in education:
Instructional leadership and school reform. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Paine, L., & Ma, L. P. (1993). Teachers working together: A dialogue
on organizational and cultural perspectives of Chinese teachers.
International Journal of Educational Research, 19(8), 675–697.
Peterson, P., McCarthey, S., & Elmore, R. (1996). Learning from
school restructuring. American Educational Research Journal,
33, 119–153.
Prosser, J. (1999). The evolution of school culture research. In J.
Prosser (Ed.), School culture (pp. 1–14). London: Paul Chapman.
Rashid, M. Z. A., Sambasivan, M., & Johari, J. (2003). The influence
of corporate culture and organisational commitment on perfor-
mance. Journal of Management Development, 22(8), 708–728.
Rousseau, D. (1990). Assessing organizational culture: The case for
multiple methods. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate
and culture (pp. 153–192). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
123
C. Zhu et al.
Schoen, L. T., & Teddlie, C. (2008). A new model of school culture:
A response to a call for conceptual clarity. School Effectiveness
and School Improvement, 19(2), 129–153.
Scrimshaw, P. (2004). Enabling teachers to make successful use of
ICT. British educational communications and technology
agency. Retrieved March 2, 2010, http://partners.becta.org.uk/
uploaddir/downloads/page_documents/research/enablers.pdf.
Seashore, K. R. (2009). Leadership and change in school: Personal
reflections over the last 30 years. Journal of Educational
Change, 10, 129–140.
Shann, M. H. (1998). Professional commitment and satisfaction
among teachers in urban middle schools. Journal of Educational
Research, 92, 67–74.
Shaw, J., & Reyes, P. (1992). School cultures: organizational value
orientation and commitment. Journal of Educational Research,
85(5), 295–301.
Sinden, J., Hoy, W. K., & Sweetland, S. R. (2004). Enabling school
structures: Principal leadership and organizational commitment
of teachers. Journal of School Leadership, 14, 195–210.
Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 339–358.
Solvason, N. (2005). Investigating specialist school ethos… or do you
mean culture? Educational Studies, 31(1), 85–94.
Staessens, K. (1990). The professional culture in elementary schools
in Flanders. An empirical study in reformed primary education.
Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational
commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 46–56.
Stoll, L. (1999). School culture: Black hole or fertile garden for
school improvement? In J. Prosser (Ed.), School culture.
London: Paul Chapman.
Stoll, L., & Fink, D. (1995). Changing our schools. Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Stolp, S., & Stuart, C. S. (1994). School culture and climate: The role
of the leader. OSSC Bulletin, Eugene: Oregon School Study
Council.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate
statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Van Houtte, Mieke. (2005). Climate or culture? A plea for conceptual
clarity in school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and
School Improvement, 16(1), 71–89.
Van Petegem, K., Creemers, B. P. M., Rosseel, Y., & Aelterman, A.
(2005). Relationships between teacher characteristics, Interper-
sonal teacher behaviour and teacher wellbeing, Journal of
Classroom Interaction, 40(2), 34–43.
Ward, E., & Davis, E. (1995). The Effect of benefits satisfaction on
organizational commitment. Compensation and Benefits Man-
agement, 11(3), 35–39.
Xi, C. H. (2007). Constructing school environment and culture,
promoting mental health and education. Retrieved April 9, 2009,
http://www.gdfz.edu.cn/Article_Show.asp?ArticleID=311.