School-Level Environment Questionnaire

Abstract

The School-Level Environment Questionnaire (SLEQ) is a robust 56-item psychological instrument developed by Fisher and Fraser (1990) to assess teachers’ perceptions of the psychological environment within their schools. The primary goal of the SLEQ is to capture the complex social and organizational climate influencing staff behavior and job satisfaction, which significantly impacts overall school effectiveness.

The instrument is notable for utilizing two distinct answer forms: one designed to measure the actual environment currently experienced by teachers, and a second designed to capture the preferred or ideal environmental state. This dual approach allows for the identification of discrepancies between reality and aspiration, which is crucial for targeted school improvement and organizational development efforts.

Keywords

School environment, Teacher perception, Organizational climate, Educational research, Work Environment Scale, School improvement, Educational psychology, Teacher job satisfaction

Authors

Fisher, D. L., Fraser, B. J.

Purpose

The fundamental purpose of the School-Level Environment Questionnaire (SLEQ) is to provide a standardized, quantifiable measure of the non-physical, human aspects of a school setting. By focusing specifically on the viewpoint of teachers, the scale offers critical insights into how the existing administrative structures, collegial relationships, and resource availability are experienced by instructional staff members.

The SLEQ serves as a diagnostic tool for administrators and researchers, enabling them to evaluate the efficacy of current school policies, identify areas of strain (such as low resource adequacy or high work pressure), and benchmark the actual school environment against the ideal professional climate desired by the teaching staff. The comparison between the actual and preferred forms facilitates the planning of specific interventions aimed at reducing environmental stress and increasing teacher morale.

Construct

The SLEQ measures the construct of the school psychological environment, conceptualizing it as a multi-dimensional structure rooted in the Work Environment Scale (WES) developed by Rudolph H. Moos. The scale is built upon three overarching dimensions that define organizational climate:

• The Relationship Dimension (focusing on the nature and extent of personal relationships among staff).
• The Personal Development Dimension (focusing on opportunities for growth and autonomy).
• The System Maintenance and System Change Dimension (focusing on the order, clarity, and responsiveness of the school system).

These broad dimensions are operationalized through eight specific subscales, each containing seven items. The design ensures comprehensive coverage of the environment, moving beyond simple satisfaction measures to capture structural and relational dynamics.

Validity

The initial validation of the SLEQ was addressed in the 1990 paper presented by Fisher and Fraser, confirming its suitability for use in educational research settings. The scale derives significant initial content and construct validity from its direct adaptation and modification of the established Work Environment Scale (WES), a widely used instrument in organizational psychology.

Further validity is suggested by the clear differentiation into subscales, which allows researchers to confirm that the items within each subscale adequately measure distinct facets of the school environment, such as the degree of staff freedom or the quality of participatory decision making, rather than measuring a single, monolithic construct.

Reliability

The reliability of the SLEQ was assessed using measures of internal consistency for each subscale. The primary metric utilized was the alpha coefficient (Cronbach’s Alpha), which is a standard estimate of how closely related a set of items are as a group.

The reported alpha coefficients for the SLEQ subscales demonstrated acceptable to strong internal consistency, ranging from a low of 0.70 to a high of 0.91. These values confirm that the items within each respective subscale are reliably measuring the underlying construct and meet standard psychometric criteria for use in social and behavioral sciences.

Factor Analysis

The structural development of the SLEQ was fundamentally guided by the factor structure of the Work Environment Scale. The WES defines 10 scales falling into three major dimensions, and the SLEQ adapted this framework to create seven original subscales, later expanding to eight. This adaptation suggests an underlying factor analysis or exploratory structural modeling was conducted to ensure the seven (or eight) subscales were empirically distinct and aligned with the intended conceptual dimensions.

Each subscale is assessed by seven items, ensuring adequate item saturation for each factor. The inclusion of the eighth, more recent subscale—Work Pressure—reflects ongoing refinement based on factor analyses or practical needs identified in subsequent research applications of the scale.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Perceptual assessment scale

Format: The instrument consists of 56 items. It uses a 5-point Likert scale for scoring, ranging from Strongly Disagree (SD) to Strongly Agree (SA). Two distinct forms are available: Actual (perceived current environment) and Preferred (ideal environment).

Language Available: English (Original development context: Australia)

Population Group: Educational Professionals (Teachers)

Age Group: Adult

Population Details: The scale was developed using three different teacher samples. The largest sample reported consisted of 109 teachers drawn from 10 elementary schools located in Tasmania, Australia.

Test Methodology: Respondents are asked to indicate their level of agreement with statements describing specific aspects of the school environment using the 5-point Likert scale. Responses are aggregated to calculate scores for the eight subscales, allowing for both scale-level and subscale-level analysis.

Keywords

School climate, Educational administration, Teacher professional development, Staff affiliation, Organizational psychology, Work pressure, Resource adequacy

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The initial validation and introduction of the scale occurred in 1990, presented by Fisher and Fraser. The original conference paper detailing the scale’s validity and use is archived through the ERIC system, identified as ERIC ED 318 757.

Information regarding current usage permissions, licensing fees, or commercial availability is not provided in the original abstract. Researchers should reference the original publication to determine appropriate usage guidelines and potential copyright restrictions.

Reference’s

• Fisher, D. L., and Fraser, B. J. (1990). Validity and use of the School-Level Environment Questionnaire. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association. ERIC ED 318 757.
• Curry, C. C. (2009). Correlation of emotional intelligence of school leaders to perceptions of school climate as perceived by teachers. DEd dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
• Fee, C. E. (2008). Teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of leader behavior: A discrepancy study. EdD dissertation, University of Memphis.
• Frederick, B. W. (2007). The effects of teachers’ perceptions of principals’ leadership style, school climate, and job satisfaction level and teacher attrition in Tennessee public skills. EdD dissertation, Union University.
• Shead, L. M. (2010). An investigation of the relationship between teachers’ ratings of their principals’ leadership style and teachers’ job satisfaction in public education. PhD dissertation, Our Lady of the Lake University.
• Simon, T. C. (2010). The relationship between campus climate and the teaching of critical thinking skills in community college classrooms. PhD dissertation, Walden University.
• Wenton, J. (2010). The impact of a principal’s sex on the climate of alternative schools. DEd dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

Items of the School-Level Environment Questionnaire

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. There are many disruptive, difficult students in the school.
2. I seldom receive encouragement from colleagues.
3. Teachers frequently discuss teaching methods and strategies with each other.
4. I am often supervised to ensure that I follow directions carefully.
5. Decisions about the running of the school are usually made by the principal or a small group of teachers.
6. It is very difficult to change anything in this school.
7. The school or department library includes an adequate selection of books and periodicals.
8. There is constant pressure to keep working.
9. Most students are helpful and cooperative to teachers.
10. I feel accepted by other teachers.
11. Teachers avoid talking with each other about teaching and learning.
12. I am not expected to conform to a particular teaching style.
13. I have to refer even small matters to a senior member of staff for a final answer.
14. Teachers are encouraged to be innovative in this school.
15. The supply of equipment and resources is inadequate.
16. Teachers have to work long hours to complete all their work.
17. Most students are pleasant and friendly to teachers.
18. I am ignored by other teachers.
19. Professional matters are seldom discussed during staff meetings.
20. It is considered very important that I closely follow syllabuses and lesson plans.
21. Action can usually be taken without gaining the approval of the subject department head or senior member of staff.
22. There is a great deal of resistance to proposals for curriculum change.
23. Video equipment, tapes, and films are readily available and accessible.
24. Teachers don’t have to work very hard in this school.
25. There are many noisy, badly behaved students.
26. I feel that I could rely on my colleagues for assistance if I should need it.
27. Many teachers attend inservice and other professional development courses.
28. There are few rules and regulations that I am expected to follow.
29. Teachers are frequently asked to participate in decisions concerning administrative policies and procedures.
30. Most teachers like the idea of change.
31. Adequate duplicating facilities and services are available to teachers.
32. There is no time for teachers to relax.
33. Students get along well with teachers.
34. My colleagues seldom take notice of my professional views and opinions.
35. Teachers show little interest in what is happening in other schools.
36. I am allowed to do almost as I please in the classroom.
37. I am encouraged to make decisions without reference to a senior member or staff.
38. New courses or curriculum materials are seldom implemented in the school.
39. Tape recorders and cassettes are seldom available when needed.
40. You can take it easy and still get the work done.
41. Most students are well mannered and respectful to the school staff.
42. I feel that I have many friends among my colleagues at this school.
43. Teachers are keen to learn from their colleagues.
44. My classes are expected to use prescribed textbooks and prescribed resource materials.
45. I must ask my subject department head or senior member of staff before I do most things.
46. There is much experimentation with different teaching approaches.
47. Facilities are inadequate for catering for a variety of classroom activities and learning groups of different sizes.
48. Seldom are there deadlines to be met.
49. Very strict discipline is needed to control many of the students.
50. I often feel lonely and left out of things in the staffroom.
51. Teachers show considerable interest in the professional activities of their colleagues.
52. I am expected to maintain very strict control in the classroom.
53. I have very little say in the running of the school.
54. New and different ideas are always being tried out in this school.
55. Projectors for filmstrips, transparencies, and films are usually available when needed.
56. It is hard to keep up with your workload.