KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / International Journal on Lifelong Education and Leadership / 2022 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

A Meta-analysis: School Administrators’ and Teachers’ Views on The Level of Administrators' Instructional Leadership Behaviours

Necdet KONAN
Aslı AĞIROĞLU BAKIR
Sayfa
23–38
Yayın Tarihi
2022-12-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

This effect size value (ES = 0.40) means that the school administrators’ views on school administrators’ instructional leadership are more positive than teachers’ views.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study aims to define the effect size of school administrators' and teachers' views on the level of administrators’ instructional leadership behaviors by meta-analysis method.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The main data source is master and doctorate dissertations, conducted between 2000-2019, which are in Turkish or English.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:This effect size value (ES = 0.40) means that the school administrators’ views on school administrators’ instructional leadership are more positive than teachers’ views.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:2000-2019 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Effect size · school administrator · instructional leadership

Abstract

This study aims to define the effect size of school administrators' and teachers' views on the level of administrators’ instructional leadership behaviors by meta-analysis method. The main data source is master and doctorate dissertations, conducted between 2000-2019, which are in Turkish or English. As a result of scanning out of 460 studies, 37 are included in the meta-analysis. The effect size, variances, and comparison of the groups for each study are calculated. “Funnel plot” and “Orwin’s Fail-Safe N” methods are used to test publication bias. As a result of the analyses, Q-statistic is Q = 172,902, and I2 is calculated as 79 %. The effect size calculated according to the random effects model is 0, 40 in favor of the school administrators [0.27; 0.50], positive and statistically significant. This effect size value (ES = 0.40) means that the school administrators’ views on school administrators’ instructional leadership are more positive than teachers’ views.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KONAN, N., BAKIR, A. A. (2022). A Meta-analysis: School Administrators’ and Teachers’ Views on The Level of Administrators' Instructional Leadership Behaviours. International Journal on Lifelong Education and Leadership, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 23–38. https://ajindex.com/articles/875976

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (5)

  1. Ada, Ş.& Gümüş, S. (2012). The reflection of instructional leadership concept on educational administration master’s programs: A comparison of Turkey and the United State of America. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(2), 462–474.
  2. Arslan, G. (2007). A comparison of school principals 'instructional leadership perspective and teachers' professional burnout: Çaycuma case.(Unpublished Phd. dissertation). Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Zonguldak. Aytekin, H. (2014). Investigation of the relationship between teachers' perceived situational leadership styles and instructional leadership roles of secondary school principals: The case of Kartal district.(Unpublished Phd. dissertation). Yeditepe University,İstanbul.
  3. Belenkuyu, C. (2015). The effect of organizational citizenship behaviour on organizational outcomes and leadership styles: A meta-analysis study.(Unpublished MasterThesis), Eskişehir Osmangazi University,Eskişehir. Blase, J., & Blase, J. (1999). Principals’ instructional leadership and teacher development: Teachers’ perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 349-378.
  4. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 2. Englewood, NJ: Biostat. Brynelson, A. (2014). Teacher perceptions about principal instructional leadership. (Unpublished Phd. dissertation), Seattle Pacific University. Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York: The Guilford Press.
  5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2ndedition). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (Eds.). (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2ndedition). New York: Russell Sage Publication. Coşar, N. (2010). Levels of classroom teachers' fulfillment of instructional leadership roles: Bolu province case,(Unpublished Master Thesis), Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu. Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. Çelik, M. (2010). Analysis of instructional leadership behaviour of school administrators and organizational citizenship behaviours of teachers according to teacher views,(Unpublished Master Thesis). Selçuk University,Konya. Çelikten, Mustafa. (1998) The instructional leadership tasks of high school assistant principals and factors that enhance or inhibit the enactment of these tasks,(Unpublished dissertation). Univers