رابطه‌ی فلسفه‌ی تربیتی و سبک رهبری مدیران مدارس

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• علی خلخالی ¹
• جواد خلعتبری ¹
• مریم اذعانی ²

¹ استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تنکابن

² مدرس دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تنکابن

چکیده

این پژوهش در پی بررسی رابطه‌ی فلسفه‌ی تربیتی مدیران با سبک رهبری آنان است و پژوهشی توصیفی از نوع همبستگی می‌باشد. نمونه‌ی آماری پژوهش 118 نفر از مدیران مدارس راهنمایی غرب استان مازندران بودند که به روش طبقه‌ای نسبی انتخاب شدند. برای گرد آوری داده‌ها از دو پرسشنامه‌ی "سنجش فلسفه‌ی تربیتی" و "سنجش سبک رهبری باولز" استفاده شد. برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها از شاخص‌های گرایش مرکزی، آزمون همبستگی کانونی و پیرسون و ضریب تعیین استفاده شده است. نتایج نشان داده اند که بین انواع فلسفه‌ی تربیتی و سبک‌های رهبری همبستگی کانونی معنی دار وجود دارد. هم‌چنین، ضرایب تعیین برآورد شده نشان می‌دهند که فلسفه‌ی "ماهیت گرایی" توان تبیین سبک رهبری "خلاقیت و نوآوری" و فلسفه "پایدارگرایی"توان تبیین سبک رهبری" خود هدایت گری و فلسفه "پیشرفت گرایی" توان تبیین سبک رهبری "بازشناسی و پیشرفت شغلی" و فلسفه "بازسازی گرایی" ، توان تبیین سبک رهبری "خلاقیت و نوآوری" و فلسفه "رفتارگرایی" توان تبیین سبک‌های رهبری "خودبرانگیختگی توام با جدیت" و "همکاری و تعهدآفرینی" و فلسفه "هستی گرایی" توان تبیین سبک رهبری "خود برانگیختگی توام با جدیت" را دارا هستند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• فلسفه‌ی تربیتی
• سبک رهبری
• آزمون همبستگی کانونی

20.1001.1.20086369.1390.2.6.2.8

---

عنوان مقاله [English]

Educational Philosophy and Leadership Style of School Principals

نویسندگان [English]

• A Khalkhali ¹
• J Khaetabari ¹
• M Ezani ²

چکیده [English]

The purpose of the present study is to assess the relationship between Educational philosophies and Leadership styles of school principals. The study is descriptive and correlational in nature and aims at answering the following two main questions: 1. Is there a correlation between the type of educational philosophies and leadership styles of school principals? 2. Can the principals’ educational philosophies, predict their leadership styles? The population of the study consists of the school principals in West of Mazandaran of which 118 school principals were selected through a ‘stratified sampling approach. For data collection the following couple of measures were made use of: Assessment of Educational Philosophy" and “Bowles’ Leadership Styles and Preferences Audit Tool”. For data analysis, indices of central tendency, canonical correlation, and Pearson's coefficient of determination were used. The results show that there is a Canonical Correlation between different educational philosophies and leadership styles. Moreover,‘Coefficients Determined Estimates’ show that:‘Essentialism philosophy’ can explain the leadership style of "creativity and innovation"; ‘Perennialism philosophy’ can explain the leadership style of "Self-Direction". ‘Progressivism philosophy’ can explain the leadership style of "Recognition and Career Advancement"; while the ‘Reconstructionism philosophy’ can explain the leadership style of "creativity and innovation". ‘Behaviorism philosophy’ can explain the leadership style of "Drive and Determination" and "Working with Others and Building Commitment". Finally, "Existentialism philosophy" can explain the leadership style of "Drive and Determination".

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Educational Philosophy
• Leadership Style
• Canonical Correlation Test

مراجع

Azari, H. (1991). A study of organizational climate in relation to the

leadership behavior and self concept of principals in the primary and secondary

schools of Kerman city (Iran). PH.D Dissertation. India.

 Bowles, M.S. (2009). Leadership Styles and Preferences Audit Tool. Institute

for Working Futures. www.marcbowles.com.

 Bush, Tony. (2007) Educational leadership and management: theory, policy,

and practice. South African Journal of Education, Vol.27 (No.3). pp. 391-406.

 Coleman, J. Craig. (2007). “Know Thyself” The importance of self-analysis

for the school/community leader. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from

http://cns.org/content/m14427/latest

 Delavare, A, (2006). Research Methods in Psychology and Education.

Tehran. Virayesh Press, fourth ed.

 Ebrahim-Zadeh, A. (2004). Philosophy of education. Tehran.Payam-e-Noor

Press.

 Ediger, Marlow.(1991). Relevancy in the Elementary. Curriculum Kirksville,

Missouri: Simpson Publishing Company, 95-99.

 English, F.W. (2009). Educational Leadership and Administration. Volume 1.

SAGE.

 Fiedler, F, E. (1965). Engineer the job to fit the manager, Harvard Business

Review 43, No. 5.

 Griz, A. (2002). What is your educational philosophy? Translation by

Bakhtiar Shabani and others. (2004), Mashhad. Astan Qods Razavi Press.

 Hersey, P; Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of organizational behavior:

utilizing human resources.

 Hersey, P; Blanchard, K. (1986). Organizational Behavior Management,

Translated by Qasem Kabiri (1999), Tehran.Jihad-e-Daneshgahi Press.

 Khalkhali, A; Rahmati, M. (2008). Provide a model for measuring teachers’

educational philosophy. IRAN, unpublished paper.

 Krejcie, R. V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for

research activities Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610. .

 Krueger, D.A. (1984). Secondary school climate relative to building

leadership behavior. ED.D., seattle University.

 Louis, J.P. & Todd, D.F. (1969). The relationship of principals leadership

training and personality to the organizational climates of schools. Ed. D.,

University of Southern California.

 Lussier, R.N.; Achua, C.F.(2007). Effective Leadership. Thomson South

Western.

 Martha J. Livingston, B.R. MacClain (1995). Assessing the consistency

between teachers, philosophies and educational goals. Education, 116 (1). 

 Nicknami, M.; Taghipour Z. A.; Delavar, A. & Ghafary M. M. (2009). the

Design and Evaluation of a Causal Model of Creativity and Innovation of

Educational Administrators in Tehran City. Quarterly Journal of New

Approaches in Educational Administration. Iran. IAU, Marvdasht Branch,

VOL.2/NO.4/Summer.

 Olson, J.R. (1988). A retrospective study of the relationship between

organizational climate and leadership in a new community college. The

university of Texas at Austin, Ph.D., Dissertation Abstracts International,

volume 49, number 09 (1989).

 Pajak, E. (1993). Chang and Continuity in Supervision and Leadership.

Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (

ASCD ).

 Robinson, V.M.J.; Lioyd, A.C. & Rowe, K.J. ( 2008 ). The Impact of

Leadership on Student Outcomes: AnAnalysis of the Differential Effects of

Leadership Types. Educational Administration Quarterly, xx(x): 1-39.

 Schimmoeller, L. J. (2010). Leadership Styles in Competing Organizational

Cultures. Kravis Leadership Institute, Leadership Review, Vol. 10, Summer,

pp.125 - 141.

 Shah, S. (2006). Educational Leadership: An Islamic Perspective. British

Educational Research Journal, 32(3):363-385.

 Tannenbaum R. & Schmidt, W.H. (1986). How to choose a leadership

pattern, Harvard Business Review 64, 131- 142.