Journals / Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 54

-

OKUL İKLİMİ, ÖĞRETİMSEL LİDERLİK VE YÖNETSEL LİDERLİK DEĞİŞKENLERİNİN OKUL YÖNETİCİLİĞİNE ATAMA YAKLAŞIMLARI AÇISINDAN AYIRT EDİCİLİK DÜZEYİ

Pages
0
Publication Date
2015-04-01
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)

Results indicated that school principals were correctly classified into three different groups at a rate of 51% in terms of school climate (teacher morale), instructional management, instructional supervision, accountable management and bureaucratic management.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the present study was to determine whether school climate-teacher morale, instructional management and instructional supervision subdimensions of instructional leadership and accountable management and bureaucratic management subdimensions of administrative leadership correctly classify three groups into which 19 countries were categorized depending on their approaches to training of prospective school principals (pre-appointment training, post-appointment training and appointment without any training or preparation).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data were extracted from TALIS 2008 Principal Questionnaire (Teaching and Learning International Survey).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results indicated that school principals were correctly classified into three different groups at a rate of 51% in terms of school climate (teacher morale), instructional management, instructional supervision, accountable management and bureaucratic management.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2008 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Okul yöneticisi atama yaklaşımları · okul yöneticiliği eğitimi · TALIS 2008

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether school climate-teacher morale, instructional management and instructional supervision subdimensions of instructional leadership and accountable management and bureaucratic management subdimensions of administrative leadership correctly classify three groups into which 19 countries were categorized depending on their approaches to training of prospective school principals (pre-appointment training, post-appointment training and appointment without any training or preparation). Correlational survey model was used in this research as the researchers attempted to analyze correlations between variables and the level of correlations. Data were extracted from TALIS 2008 Principal Questionnaire (Teaching and Learning International Survey). Discriminant analysis was employed to examine correct classification levels of countries by the variables included in this study. Results indicated that school principals were correctly classified into three different groups at a rate of 51% in terms of school climate (teacher morale), instructional management, instructional supervision, accountable management and bureaucratic management. The findings of the research demonstrated that the most effective independent variables in classifying the countries into groups correctly were instructional management, school climate and instructional supervision, respectively. Based on the findings, it may be suggested that instructional leadership and school climate, specifically, must be included in the trainings organized for school principal positions

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı; okul iklimi-öğretmen morali, öğretimsel liderliğinin alt boyutları olan öğretimsel yönetim ve öğretimsel denetim ile yönetsel liderliğin alt boyutları olan hesapverebilir yönetim ve bürokratik yönetim değişkenlerinin okul müdürü olabilmek için yöneticilik eğitimine yer verme biçimleri açısından üç gruba (atama öncesi eğitim veren, atama sonrası eğitim veren ve eğitim vermeden yöneticilik görevine atayan) ayrılan 19 ülkenin yer aldıkları grupları doğru sınıflandırma düzeyini belirlemektir. Araştırmada değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiler ve ilişki dereceleri analiz edilmesinden dolayı, araştırma ilişkisel tarama modeli kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmanın verileri, TALIS (Uluslararası Öğretme ve Öğrenme Anketi) 2008 okul müdürü anketinden derlenerek elde edilmiştir. Araştırmada ele alınan değişkenlerin ülkeleri doğru sınıflandırma düzeyleri diskriminant analizi ile belirlenmiştir. Sınıflandırma sonuçlarına göre, üç farklı grupta yer alan ülkelerdeki okul yöneticileri; okul iklimi (öğretmen morali), öğretimsel yönetim, öğretimsel denetim, hesapverebilir yönetim ve bürokratik yönetim değişkenlerine göre ayrıldığında herhangi bir yöneticinin yer aldığı grubun doğru sınıflandırılma değeri % 51’dir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre, ülkeleri doğru sınıflandırmada en fazla katkısı bulunan bağımsız değişkenler sırasıyla öğretimsel yönetim, okul iklimi ve öğretimsel denetimdir. Araştırmanın sonuçlarına dayalı olarak; okul yöneticiliğine atamada kullanılan yöneticilik eğitimlerinde özellikle öğretimsel liderlik ve okul iklimi konularına yer verilmesi önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BALKAR, B., KALMAN, M. (2015). -. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 54, 0. https://ajindex.com/articles/97701

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Aslanargun, E. ve Bozkurt, S. (2012). Okul müdürlerinin okul yönetiminde karşılaştığı sorunlar. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2), 349-368. Avrupa Komisyonu [European Commission] (2013). Avrupa’da öğretmenler ve okul liderlerine ilişkin temel veriler. Eurydice Raporu. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/key_data_series/151TR.pdf (23.02.2014).
  2. Barber, M. E. (2006). Leadership preparation programs and principal instructional and transformational leadership practice: The influence of preparation on practice and leader outcomes. Doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University. Behbahani, A. (2011). Educational leaders and role of education on the efficiency of schools principals. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 9-11.
  3. Black, S. (2001). Morale matters: When teachers feel good about their work, research shows, student achievement rises. American School Board Journal, 188(1), 40-43. Blasé J. and Blasé, J. (2000). Effective instructional leadership: Teachers’ perspectives on how principals promote teaching and learning in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 130-141. Bolívar-Botía, A. and Bolívar-Ruano, R. (2011). School principals in Spain: From manager to leader. International Journal of Education, 3(1),1-18.
  4. Bowers A. J. and White, B. R. (2014). Do principal preparation and teacher qualifications influence different types of school growth trajectories in Illinois?. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 705-736.
  5. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S. and Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303-333.
  6. Brauckmann, S. and Pashiardis, P. (2011). A validation study of the leadership styles of a holistic leadership theoretical framework. International Journal of Educational Management, 25(1), 11-32.
  7. Brazer, S. D. and Bauer, S. C. (2013). Preparing instructional leaders: A model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(4), 645-684.
  8. Brundrett, M., Fitzgerald, T. and Sommefeldt, D. (2006). The creation of national programmes of school leadership development in England and New Zealand: A comparative study. International Studies in Educational Administration, 34(1): 89–105.
  9. Bush, T. (2008). Leadership and management development in education, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Bush, T. (2009). Leadership development and school improvement: Contemporary issues in leadership