大量学者处理家长对学校的信任，作为组织顺利运作的支持因素（亚当斯等）。2009；风暴和风暴2002；塔特等人。1989）一个难以定义和衡量的概念。其中最有影响力的最近讨论的信任来自学者吉登斯（1990），它定义为对一个人或系统的可靠性的信心，也与它的概念，如承诺和连续性。吉登斯（1990）认为，人的基本信任的发展使人免受深层焦虑的困扰。此外，另一位学者研究这一概念是Luhmann（1979）谁看到的信任不是主体或客体但交际信息和一个系统的最重要的因素。理论和定义在本研究的文献综述中不明显。 首先，在本文中，作者适当地强调了存在的重要性，家长的信任，学校作为一个关键因素，在孩子的成就和整体解决任何问题。其次，在对领导角色在学校中的作用以及家长对其信任的意义进行了较为深入的分析后，给出了一些信任的定义，这是不令人满意的。然而，一个问题是由作者在这部分使用的参考文献中产生的。为什么他们重复相同的来源？（Hoy和Tcchannen Moran 1999，Tcchannen Moran 2003，Tcchannen Moran 2004）文章可能如果作者不注重这二三个来源是更准确的书目。这些参考文献中的概念是相似的，因为主要作者是相同的，在文献综述中没有提到不同的意见。相反，读者会想到一个关于这个来源缺乏来源的名单，这与家长对残疾儿童的信任对校长，而不是一般学校的工作人员的信任。
澳洲地产管理代写论文:学校的信任
Many scholars deal with parents’ trust in schools in general as a supportive element of the smooth operation of the organizations (Adams et al. 2009; Strom and Strom 2002; Tarter et al. 1989), a concept which is so difficult to define and measure. One of the most influential recent discussions of trust comes from the scholar Giddens (1990) who defines it as confidence in the reliability of a person or system and also relates it to concepts like commitments and continuity. Giddens (1990) observes that by the development of basic trust in others people protect themselves from deep-seated anxiety. Furthermore, another one scholar who studied this concept is Luhmann (1979) who saw trust as not a subject or object but a communicative message and one of the most important elements of the systems. Theories and definitions which are not apparent in the literature review of this research.Firstly, in this article, the authors appropriately highlight the importance of the existence of parents’ trust in schools as a key element in the children achievement and on the whole in the solution any problems. Secondly, the authors gave some definitions of trust before moving on in a more analytical discussion about the role of leader in school and the significance of parents’ trust on it, which are not satisfactory. However, a question is arising from the references which the authors are using in this part. Why are they repeating the same sources? (Hoy and Tcchannen-Moran 1999, Tcchannen-Moran 2003, Tcchannen-Moran 2004) The article might have been more accurate bibliographic if authors do not focus only on those two-three sources. The concept in these references is similar because the main writer is the same and not different opinions are mentioned in the literature review. Conversely, the reader would expect a list of reasons about this lack of sources on this topic which has to do with the trust of parents with disabled children toward principals and not generally schools’ staff.