SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitim ve Bilim / 2003 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 129

Eğitim Yöneticilerinin Değişen Rolleri

The Changing Role of Educational Administrators

Mehmet KORKMAZ
Pages
3–14
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)

However, sex, seniority and level of education did not show any significant difference.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the study is to determine the changing role behaviours of administrators in general high schools.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data collection instrument was administered to 232 teachers and 51 administrators.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, sex, seniority and level of education did not show any significant difference.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to determine the changing role behaviours of administrators in general high schools. These changes are categorized under nine topics. School administrators' changing role behaviours and teachers perceptions in terms of their type of job, seniority, sex and level of education were analyzed to see if there were signifıcant relationships between these teachers' characteristics and perception. The data collection instrument was administered to 232 teachers and 51 administrators. The results of the study revealed a significant difference between teachers' type of job and their perceptions about school administrators changing role behaviours. However, sex, seniority and level of education did not show any significant difference.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı genel liselerde görev yapan okul yöneticilerinin değişen rol davranışlarını tespit etmektir. Okul yöneticilerinin değişen rol davranışları dokuz kategoride toplanmıştır. Okul yöneticilerinin değişen rol davranışlarına ilişkin öğretmen algılarının görev türü, cinsiyet, mesleki kıdem ve öğrenim durumlarına göre anlamlı bir farklılık gösterip göstermediği araştırılmıştır. Araştırmada kullanılan veri toplama aracı 232 öğretmen ve 51 yöneticiye uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları, okul yöneticilerinin değişen rol davranışlarına ilişkin öğretmen algılarının görev türüne göre anlamlı bir farklılık gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Bununla birlikte cinsiyet, mesleki kıdem ve öğrenim durumlarına göre anlamlı farklılık bulunamamıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

KORKMAZ, M. (2022). Eğitim Yöneticilerinin Değişen Rolleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 129, 3–14. https://ajindex.com/articles/498058

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Aiex, N.K. (1988). Communicating within organizational cultures. Eric Digest Number 5. Anderson, M.E. (1991). How to train, recruit, select, induct, and evaluate leaders for America's schools. Eric Clearinghouse on Educational Management, University of Oregon. Ashkenas, R. & Choice, T.V. (1995). The conceptualizing continuous improvement: Implications for organizational change. Omega International Journal of Management Science. Aydın, M. (1981). Örgütlerde çatışma nedenleri ve çözüm yolları. Ankara:
  2. Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
  3. Brewer, P. & Brevver, V. (1995). The management of diversity in a college of business environment. Journal of Education for Business, 71. Cafoğlu, Z. (1996).
  4. Eğitimde toplam kalite yönetimi, İstanbul: Avni Akyol Ümit Kültür ve Eğitim Vakfı Yayınları.
  5. Conley, D.T. (1993). Roadmap to restructuring Policies, practices and the emerging visions of schooling. Eugene,Oregon: Clearinghouse on Educational Management, University of Oregon. Cuban, L. (1991). Managing conflict. Office of Educational Research and improvement Washington, O.C. Conley, D. & Goldman, P. (1994). Facilitative leadership: How principals lead without dominating. Eugene, Oregon: August Davis, S. H. (1998). The truth about visionary leadership. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 28. Dunlop, D. & Goldman, P. (1990). Power as a system of authority, power as a system of facilitation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, Massachusetts, April 16-20 25 ED: 325 943. Erçetin, Ş. (2000). Lider sarmalında vizyon. (Genişletilmiş 2. Baskı). Ankara:
  6. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. Firth, J. (1991). A proactive approach to conflict resolution. Supervisory Management, 36 (11). Greenfield, W.D. (1991). Rationale and methods to articulate ethics and administrator training. Chicago. Gümüşeli, A.İ. (1996). Okul müdürlerinin öğretim liderliğini sınırlayan etkenler. Ankara:
  7. PEBEM Yayınları.
  8. Hard, S. (1997). Facilitative leadership: The imperative for change. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, ED. 370217. Katzenbach, Jan. R. (1997). The myth of the top management team. Harvard Business Review, November-December. Kidder, R.M. (1995). How good people make tough choices. New York: William Monow. Klug, S. (1989). Leadership and learning: A measurement-based approach for analyzing school effectiveness and developing effective school leaders. Greenvich, Connecticut: J. Al Press.
  9. Lashway, L. (1995).
  10. Facilitative leadership. Eric Digest, Number