SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitim ve Bilim / 2016 / Cilt: 41 - Sayı: 184

Predictors of Organizational Socialization of Instructors in Higher Education

Yaşar KONDAKÇI
Fatma ATAMAN
Pages
213–233
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️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)

The results suggest higher education administrators adapt organizational and individual level managerial strategies to facilitate organizational, department and task socialization in higher education organizations

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to investigate the relationship between organizational socialization and various organizational (type of university, training, work conditions, knowledge sharing) and individual (academic degree, teaching experience, length of employment at current work place, job satisfaction, commitment, self-efficacy) level factors, both factors taken together focusing on the content, context and process dimensions of socialization.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this aim, data from 737 public and private university English language instructors were collected with an inventory consisting of three parts made up of self-developed and pre-developed scales.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results suggest higher education administrators adapt organizational and individual level managerial strategies to facilitate organizational, department and task socialization in higher education organizations
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the relationship between organizational socialization and various organizational (type of university, training, work conditions, knowledge sharing) and individual (academic degree, teaching experience, length of employment at current work place, job satisfaction, commitment, self-efficacy) level factors, both factors taken together focusing on the content, context and process dimensions of socialization. For this aim, data from 737 public and private university English language instructors were collected with an inventory consisting of three parts made up of self-developed and pre-developed scales. Taking each dimension of organizational socialization as a criterion variable, three sets of predictors were defined for three separate hierarchical regression analyses. The results revealed that socialization of instructors to the organization, department, and task are significantly predicted by several organizational and individual variables. Knowledge sharing and training are the strongest organizational level predictors while job satisfaction, selfefficacy for instructional strategies, and affective commitment are the strongest individual level predictors. The results suggest higher education administrators adapt organizational and individual level managerial strategies to facilitate organizational, department and task socialization in higher education organizations

🔖

Cite This Article

KONDAKÇI, Y., ATAMAN, F. (2022). Predictors of Organizational Socialization of Instructors in Higher Education. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt: 41 - Sayı: 184, 213–233. https://ajindex.com/articles/497363

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x Allen, T. D., McManus, S. E., & Russell, J. E. (1999). Newcomer socialization and stress: Formal peer relationships as a source of support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 453-470. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1998.1674 Angelides, P., & Mylordou, A. (2011). The beneficial outcome of a successful mentoring relationship: The development of inclusive education. Teacher Development, 15(4), 533-547.
  2. Ashford, S. J., & Cummings, L. L. (1985). Proactive feedback seeking: The instrumental use of the information environment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58, 61-79.
  3. Balfour, D. L., & Wechsler, B. (1990). Organizational commitment: A reconceptualization and empirical test of public-private difference. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 10, 23-40.
  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company. Bandura, A., & Wood, R. E. (1989). Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on self-regulation of complex decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 805-814.
  5. Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. T., & Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 707-721. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.707 Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organizations and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Boswell, W. R., Shipp, A. J., Payne, S. C., & Culbertson, S. S. (2009). Changes in newcomer job satisfaction over time: Examining the pattern of honeymoons and hangovers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 844-858. doi:10.1037/a0014975 Boyer, E. L., Altbach, P. G., & Whitelaw, M. J. (1994). The academic profession: An international perspective. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models (pp. 136-162).
  6. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J. A., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1990). Building organizational commitm