SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 3

Relationships Between Distributed Leadership and School Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis Study

Paylaşılan Liderlik ve Okul Çıktıları Arasındaki İlişkiler: Bir Meta-Analiz Çalışması

Erkan Göktaş(Selçuk Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi)0000-0002-3150-0142
Metin Kaya(İSTANBUL MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8287-4929
Pages
309–324
Publication Date
2023-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results show that distributed leadership practices are positively related to organizational effectiveness and effective teacher behaviors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Distributed leadership supports giving chance to all employees in the organization to contribute to the management by using their talents and distributing the leadership responsibility to the whole team rather than being in one person.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 39 studies that met the inclusion criteria were accessed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results show that distributed leadership practices are positively related to organizational effectiveness and effective teacher behaviors.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dağıtılmış liderlik · Okul ürünleri · Meta analiz

Abstract

Distributed leadership supports giving chance to all employees in the organization to contribute to the management by using their talents and distributing the leadership responsibility to the whole team rather than being in one person. Thus, it establishes a collective leadership understanding in the organization by giving people the opportunity to lead according to their areas of expertise. The aim of this study is to examine the relationships between distributed leadership and school outcomes in the Turkish context by meta-analysis method. In this study, school outcomes were examined under two main subdimensions which were organizational outcomes and teacher outcomes. The relationships between distributed leadership and subdimensions of school outcomes were expressed in terms of correlational effect sizes. A total of 39 studies that met the inclusion criteria were accessed. Since the included studies were obtained from different sampling structures, random effects model was used in the analysis. As a result of the analyses, level of the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational outcomes is very strong (ES=r =.63) and level of the relationship between distributed leadership and teacher outcomes is medium (ES=r =.38). These results show that distributed leadership practices are positively related to organizational effectiveness and effective teacher behaviors. It is also observed that the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational outcomes does not differ according to the moderator variables. However, the relationship between distributed leadership and teacher outcomes differs according to the sampling method

Özet

Paylaşılan liderlik, örgütteki her çalışana şans tanıyarak yeteneklerini kullanmak suretiyle yönetime katkı sağlamasını ve liderlik sorumluluğunun bir kişide olmasından çok tüm ekibe paylaşılmasını savunur. Böylelikle kişilere uzmanlık alanlarına göre liderlik yapma fırsatı vererek örgütte kolektif bir liderlik anlayışı tesis eder. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye bağlamında paylaşılan liderlik ve okul çıktıları arasındaki ilişkileri meta analiz yöntemiyle incelemektir. Çalışmada okul çıktıları, örgütsel çıktılar ve öğretmen çıktıları olmak üzere iki alt boyutta ele alınmıştır. Paylaşılan liderlik ile okul çıktılarının alt boyutları arasındaki ilişkiler korelasyonel etki büyüklükleri türünden ifade edilmiştir. Dahil etme kriterlerine uygun toplam 39 çalışmaya erişilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamındaki çalışmalar farklı örneklem yapılarından elde edildiği için verilerin analizinde rastgele etkiler modeli kullanılmıştır. Analizler sonucunda paylaşılan liderlik ve örgütsel çıktılar arasındaki ilişkinin çok güçlü düzeyde (ES=r=.63); paylaşılan liderlik ve öğretmen çıktıları arasındaki ilişkinin ise orta düzeyde (ES=r=.38) olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlar, paylaşılan liderlik uygulamalarının örgütsel etkililikle ve etkili öğretmen davranışlarıyla olumlu yönde ilişkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Paylaşılan liderlik ve örgütsel çıktılar arasındaki ilişkinin moderatör değişkenlere göre farklılaşmadığı gözlenmiştir. Paylaşılan liderlik ve öğretmen çıktıları arasındaki ilişkinin örnekleme yöntemine göre farklılaştığı tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Göktaş, E., Kaya, M. (2023). Relationships Between Distributed Leadership and School Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis Study. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 3, 309–324. https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1132631

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (91)

  1. Acar, S., Bilen Kazancık, L., Meydan, M., C., Işık, M (2019). İllerin ve bölgelerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik sıralaması araştırması SEGE-2017.Ankara, Kalkınma Ajansları Genel Müdürlüğü Yayını Sayı:3. (Erişim: 09/04/2022), https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/merkez-birimi/b94224510b7b/sege/il-sege-raporlari
  2. Adıgüzelli, Y. (2016). Examining the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational trust according to opinions of teachers. Education and Science, 41(185), 269-280.
  3. Ağıroğlu Bakır, A. (2013). Öğretmenlerin paylaşılan liderlik ve örgütsel bağlılık algıları arasındaki ilişkinin analizi. (Doktora tezi). İnönü Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Malatya.
  4. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). Organizational Socialization tactics: A longitudinal analysis of links to newcomers’ commitment and role orientation. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 847-858.
  5. Ataş Akdemir, Ö. (2016). Öğretmen algılarına göre okul yöneticilerinin dağıtımcı liderlik davranışlarının okulların akademik iyimserlikleri ile örgütsel bağlılık ve okul başarısıyla ilişkisi. (Doktora tezi). Atatürk Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Erzurum.
  6. Baloğlu, N. (2011). Değerler temelli liderlik ile dağıtımcı liderlik arasındaki ilişkiler: okul müdürünün davranışını değerlendirmeye dönük nedensel bir araştırma. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12 (2) [Ek Özel Sayı], 1367-1378.
  7. Baloğlu, N. (2012). Relations between value-based leadership and distributed leadership: A casual research on school principles’ behaviors. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice - 12 (2) [Supplementary Special Issue], 1375-1378.
  8. Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 587-595.
  9. Bildirici, S. (2020). Okul etkililiğinin işten ayrılma niyeti üzerine etkisinde paylaşılan liderliğin aracılık rolü. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Gaziantep Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Gaziantep.
  10. Bektaş, F., Kılınç, A.Ç., & Gümüş, S. (2020). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher professional learning: mediating roles of teacher trust in principal and teacher motivation, Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/03055698.2020.1793301
  11. Borenstein, M., & Hedges, L. (2019). Effect sizes for meta-analysis. C., Harris, L., Hedges, & J. Valentine (Eds.) in Handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp.207-245). NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
  12. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to meta-analysis. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  13. Bostancı, A.B., Gidiş, Y., Uğurlu, E., & Dilsiz, F. (2018). Okullardaki paylaşılan liderlik uygulamaları ile öğretmenlerin örgütsel güven düzeyleri ve işe karşı olumlu duygu durumları arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi. Turkish Studies, 13(27), 286-298.
  14. Bostancı, A.B. (2013). The prediction level of teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviors on the successful practice of shared leadership. Eğitim Araştırmaları-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 51- 177-194.
  15. Börü, N. (2020). Organizational and environmental contexts affecting school principals' distributed leadership practices. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 8(2), 172-203. https://doi.org/10.17583/ijelm.2020.4482
  16. Cansev, Ö. (2021). Öğretmen algılarına göre okul yöneticilerinin dağıtımcı liderlik davranışları ile okula bağlılıkları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Karaman.
  17. Cansoy, R., & Parlar, H. (2018). Examining the relationships among trust in administrator, distributed leadership and school academic optimism. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 24(1), 1-44. doi: 10.14527/kuey.2018.001
  18. Chiu, C. Y. C., Owens, B. P., & Tesluk, P. E. (2016). Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: The role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1705-1720
  19. Cicolini, G., Comparcini, D., & Simonetti, V. (2013). Workplace empowerment and nurses' job satisfaction: a systematic literature review. Journal of Nursing Management, 22(7), 855-871. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12468-016-0006-0
  20. Cobanoglu, N., & Bozbayindir, F. (2019). A study on shared leadership and positive psychological capitals of teachers at primary and secondary schools. Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(5): 1265-1274.
  21. Cobanoglu, N. (2020). Investigation of shared leadership and organizational commitment in primary and secondary schools: Malatya case. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(3), 613-629. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.6.3.613
  22. Cobanoglu, N. (2021). The relationship between shared leadership, employee empowerment and innovativeness in primary schools: A structural equation modeling. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 327-339. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.327
  23. Craft, A. (2002). Continuing professional development: A practical guide for teachers and schools. London: Routledge.
  24. Çakır, Ç. (2019). Dağıtılmış liderlik ile örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel kimliğin rolü. Turkish Studies, 14(4), 1189-1209. DOI: 10.29228/TurkishStudies.23482
  25. Çomak, M. (2021). Okul yöneticilerinin dağıtımcı liderlik uygulama becerileri ile örgüt iklimi arasındaki ilişkiler. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Kırşehir.
  26. Dasci Sonmez, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2022). The impact of principals’ distributed leadership behaviors on teachers’ attitudes toward multiculturalism: social justice leadership as mediator. Education and Urban Society, 1–30. DOI: 10.1177/00131245221076095 journals.sagepub.com/home/eus
  27. Daspit, J., Justice, T. C., Boyd, N. G., & Mckee, V. (2013). Cross-functional team effectiveness: An examination of internal team environment, shared leadership, and cohesion influences. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 19, 34-56.
  28. Demir Erdoğan, C. (2016). The mediating role of knowledge sharing on the relationship between distributed leadership and readiness for change among public school teachers. (Yüksek lisans tezi). ODTÜ Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
  29. Dhani, R., & Bakshi, R. (2020). A systematic literature review of distributive leadership applications for meeting challenges of VUCCA educational environment under COVID-19. Globsyn Management Journal, 14(1/2), 2-16.
  30. D’Innocenzo, L., Mathieu, J.E., & Kukenberger, M.R. (2016). A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership–team performance relations. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1964 –1991.
  31. Dinçel, G. (2012). Kurumsal itibar ile örgütsel kıvanç, duygusal bağlılık ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi: Bir araştırma. (Doktora tezi). Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Kocaeli.
  32. Ereş, F., & Akyürek, İ. (2016). İlkokul müdürlerinin dağıtılmış liderlik davranışları ile öğretmenlerin iş doyumu algıları arasındaki ilişki düzeyleri. GEFAD / GUJGEF 36(3): 427-449.
  33. Ertürk, R. & Sezgin Nartgün Ş. (2019). The relationship between teacher perceptions of distributed leadership and schools as learning organizations. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 6(2), 381-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.596918
  34. Fausing, M. S., Joensson, T. S., Lewandowski, J., & Bligh, M. (2015). Antecedents of shared leadership: Empowering leadership and interdependence. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36, 271-291.
  35. Funder, D. C., & Ozer, D. J. (2019). Evaluating effect size in psychological research: Sense and nonsense. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2(2), 156-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919847202
  36. Goleman, D. (2002) The new leaders: Transforming the art of leadership into the science of results. London: Little Brown.
  37. Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed properties: A new architecture for leadership. Educational Management and Administration, 28, 317–338
  38. Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 423–451.
  39. Gunes, D. Z. (2016). The Relationships among shared leadership, trust in school principals and innovation management in school, The Anthropologist, 24(1), 43-54, DOI: 10.1080/09720073.2016.11891988
  40. Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125-142.
  41. Hallinger, P. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 5-24.
  42. Harris, A. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or misleading? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1), 11-24. DOI: 10.1177/1741143204039297
  43. Harris, A. (2005). Crossing boundaries and breaking barriers: Distributed leadership in schools. London: Specialist Schools Trust.
  44. Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership through the looking glass. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2).
  45. Harris, A. (2014). Leading educational change and improvement. In Distributed leadership matters: Perspectives, practicalities, and potential (pp. 9-16). Corwin Press, https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483332574.n2
  46. Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2009). Assessing the contribution of distributed leadership to school improvement and growth in math achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 659-689.
  47. Hester, H., & Geert, D. (2009). Exploring the link between distributed leadership and job satisfaction of school leaders. Educational Studies, 35(2),153-171. DOI:10.1080/03055690802648739
  48. Hester, H., Geert, D., & Yves, R. (2009). The relationship between the perception of distributed leadership in secondary schools and teachers' and teacher leaders' job satisfaction and organizational commitment. School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice, 20(3), 291-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09243450902909840
  49. Jin, Z. C., Zhou, X. H., & He, J. (2015). Statistical methods for dealing with publication bias in meta‐analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 34(2), 343-360. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6342
  50. Karaavcı, M.F. (2021). Öğretmenlerin paylaşılan liderlik ve okul kültürü algıları arasındaki ilişki. (Yüksek lisans tezi). İnönü Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Malatya.
  51. Kılınç, A.Ç. (2014). A quantitative study of the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational citizenship behavior: Perceptions of Turkish primary school teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 3(2), 69-78.
  52. Kilicoglu, D. (2018). Understanding democratic and distributed leadership: how democratic leadership of school principals related to distributed leadership in schools? Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 13(3), 6-23. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2018.150.1
  53. Kondakci, Y., Zayim, M., Beycioglu, K., Sincar, M., & Ugurlu, C.T. (2016). The mediating roles of internal context variables in the relationship between distributed leadership perceptions and continuous change behaviors of public-school teachers. Educational Studies, 42:4, 410-426, DOI: 10.1080/03055698.2016.1206462
  54. Kösterelioğlu, M.A. (2017) The effect of teachers' shared leadership perception on academic optimism and organizational citizenship behavior: A Turkish case. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(2), 246-258, DOI:10.1080/13603124.2015.1066868
  55. Koç, H. (2009). Örgütsel bağlılık ve sadakat ilişkisi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(28), 200-211.
  56. Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. (2019). Statistically analyzing effect sizes: Fixed and random-effects models. In H. Cooper, L.V. Hedges, & J.C. Valentine (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp.245-281). NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
  57. Kulu, M. (2020). Okul yöneticilerinin dağıtımcı liderlik davranışları ile öğretmenlerin mesleki topluluk düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Karaman.
  58. Kurt, T. (2016). A model to explain teacher leadership: The effects of distributed leadership model, organizational learning and teachers' sense of self-efficacy on teacher leadership. Education and Science, 41(183), 1-28.
  59. Kutanis, Ö.R., & Oruç, E. (2014). Pozitif örgütsel davranış ve pozitif psikolojik sermaye üzerine kavramsal bir inceleme. The Journal of Happiness & Well-Being, 2(2),145-159.
  60. Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., & Strauss, T. (Eds.). (2009). Distributed leadership according to the evidence. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Distributed-Leadership-According-to-the-Evidence/Leithwood-Mascall-Strauss/p/book/9780415992176
  61. Limon, İ., Dilekçi, Ü., & Demirer, S. (2021). The mediating role of initiative climate on the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational resilience in schools. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 8(1), 128-144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.829411
  62. Luthans, F., &Youssef, C. (2004). Human, social, and now positive psychological capital management: investing in people for competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 33(2), 143–160.
  63. McGuigan, L., & Hoy, W.K. (2006). Principal leadership: Creating a culture of academic optimism to improve achievement for all students. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5(3), 203-229.
  64. Mishra, J., & Morrissey, M. A. (1990). Trust in employee/employer relationships: A survey of West Michigan managers. Public Personnel Management, 19(4), 443–486.
  65. Muethel, M., Gehrlein, S., & Hoegl, M. (2012). Socio-demographic factors and shared leadership behaviors in dispersed teams: Implications for human resource management. Human Resource Management, 51, 525-548
  66. Oldaç, Y.İ. (2016). The relationship between distributed leadership, enabling school structure, teacher collaboration, academic optimism and student achievement: A school effectiveness model. (Yüksek lisans tezi). ODTÜ, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
  67. Özuylası, A. (2021). Okul yöneticilerinin paylaşılan liderlik davranışları ile okul kültürü arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Karaman.
  68. Polatcan, M. (2021): An exploration of the relationship between distributed leadership, teacher agency, and professional learning in Turkey. Professional Development in Education, DOI: 10.1080/19415257.2021.1905050
  69. Ray, H. (2019). Okullarda paylaşılan liderlik uygulamaları ile öğretmenlerin örgütsel güven düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Uşak Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Uşak.
  70. Robbins, S. (1990). Organization theory (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  71. Samancioglu, M., Baglibel, M., & Erwin, B. J. (2020). Effects of distributed leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship. Pedagogical Research, 5(2), em0052. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/6439
  72. Sarıer, Y., & Uysal, Ş. (2020). The relationship between the leadership of school administrators and the negative attitudes and behaviors of teachers in Turkey: A Meta-Analysis Study. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 10(2), 1041-1065. DOI: 10.18039/ajesi.733950
  73. Serban, A., & Roberts, A. J. (2016). Exploring antecedents and outcomes of shared leadership in a creative context: A mixed-methods approach. Leadership Quarterly, 27, 181-199.
  74. Sol, K. (2021). Distributed leadership in schools: A brief review of the literature. Cambodian Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 73–80.
  75. Spillane, J. P. (2005). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(winter), 143-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720508984678
  76. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. Jossey-Bass. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Distributed+Leadership-p-9781118429334
  77. Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221-258.
  78. Tian, M., Risku, M., & Collin, K. (2016). A meta-analysis of distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013: Theory development, empirical evidence and future research focus. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(1), 146-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214558576
  79. Titrek, O. (2016). Relations between trust in principal and shared leadership. The Anthropologist, 24(1), 300-308.
  80. Uçar, R., & Dağlı, A. (2017). İlkokul müdürlerinin dağıtımcı liderlik davranışları ile öğretmenlerin motivasyon ve yaratıcılık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16(60), 198-216.
  81. Uçar, R. (2021). The effect of school principals’ distributed leadership behaviors on teachers’ organizational commitment. International Education Studies, 14(5), 19-30.
  82. Uslu, B., & Beycioğlu, K. (2013). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin örgütsel bağlılıkları ile müdürlerin paylaşılan liderlik rolleri arasındaki ilişki. On dokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(2), 323-345.
  83. Wang, D., Waldman, D.A., & Zhang, Z. (2014). A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 181–198. Wiener, Y. (1982). Commitment in organizations: A normative view. Academy of Management Review, 7(3), 418-428.
  84. Woods, P., Bennett, N., Harvey, J. A., & Wise, C. (2004). Variabilities and dualities in distributed leadership. findings from a systematic literature review. Educational Management Administration Leadership, 32(4), 439-457.
  85. Woods, P. A. (2005). Democratic leadership in education. London: Sage.
  86. Wu, Q., Cormicon, K., & Chen, G. (2018). A meta-analysis of shared leadership: Antecedents, consequences, and moderators. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1–16.
  87. Yammarino, F. J., Salas, E., Serban, A., Shirreffs, K., & Shuffler, M. L. (2012). Collectivistic leadership approaches: Putting the “we” in leadership science and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 382–402. doi:10.1111/j.1754- 9434.2012.01467.x
  88. Yang, S., & Berdine, G. (2021). Publication bias in meta-analysis. The Southwest Respiratory and Critical Care Chronicles, 9(41), 67-70. https://doi.org/10.12746/swrccc.v9i41.945
  89. Yener, S. (2014). Özel ortaöğretim kurumlarında paylaşılan liderlik davranışı ve işten ayrılma niyeti arasındaki ilişkide psikolojik güvenlik algısının aracı değişken ilişkisinin araştırılması. (Doktora tezi). Haliç Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
  90. Yılmaz, D., & Turan, S. (2015). Dağıtılmış liderliğin okullardaki görünümü: Bir yapısal eşitlik modelleme çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 21(1), 93-126. doi:10.14527/kuey.2015.005
  91. Yılmaz, K., & Çelik, M. (2020). Öğretmenler arasında mesleki iş birliğine yönelik tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(2), 731-740.