شناسايي عوامل مؤثر بر توسعه حرفه‌ای مدیران مدارس با رويکرد آینده‌پژوهی
محورهای موضوعی : الگوهای تدوین برنامه های توسعه فردی
1 - علوم تربيتي و روان شناسي
کلید واژه: توسعه حرفه‌ای مدیران مدارس آینده‌پژوهیآموزش‌وپرورش,
چکیده مقاله :
پژوهش حاضر، باهدف شناسايي عوامل مؤثر بر توسعه حرفه‌ای مدیران مدارس مقطع متوسطه آموزش‌وپرورش استان خراسان جنوبي با رويکرد آینده‌پژوهی انجام شد. اين پژوهش بر مبنای هدف، در ذیل پژوهش‌های کاربردی و بر مبنای ماهیت پژوهش؛ جزء پژوهش‌های توصیفی- همبستگی محسوب می‌شود که به روش ترکیبی و طرح اکتشافی متوالی انجام‌شده است. در اين پژوهش با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند (18 نفر)؛ به بررسي نظر و ديدگاه مدیران ستادی آموزش‌وپرورش استان خراسان جنوبي در ارتباط با عوامل مؤثر بر توسعه حرفه‌ای مدیران مدارس در آينده پرداخته شد. در ادامه براي تأیید عوامل شناسایی‌شده پرسشنامه‌ای محقق ساخته در بين 201 از مدیران و معاونین مدارس مقطع متوسطه استان خراسان جنوبي توزيع شد. اعتبار ابزار اندازه‌گیری در بخش کیفی با استفاده از روش توافق کدگذاران و در بخش کمی، از طریق روایی همگرا و روایی واگرا مورد تأیید واقع شد. همچنین؛ پایایی پرسشنامه محقق ساخته بر اساس سه معیار ضرایب بارهای عاملی، آلفای کرونباخ (81/0) و پایایی ترکیبی (87/0) با استفاده از نرم‌افزار PLS موردبررسی قرار گرفت. برای آزمون سؤال‌های پژوهش، از نرم‌افزار MAXQDA10 و نرم‌افزار PLS3 استفاده شد. نتایج بخش کیفی پژوهش، بیانگر 39 کدباز، 6 کد سازمان دهنده و 3 کد انتخابي بود. نتایج بخش کمی پژوهش نشان داد که عوامل مؤثر بر توسعه حرفه‌ای مدارس با رويکرد آینده‌پژوهی را مي توان در قالب سه سه بعد (فردی، سازماني و محیطی) و 6 مؤلفه (مدیریتی، ارتباطي، رفتاري، روان‌شناختی، اعتقادي، عوامل محیطی و زمینه‌ای) و 39 شاخص طبقه بندي کرد که در اين بين، بعد سازماني (62/0) نقش مؤثرتری در تبیین توسعه حرفه‌ای مدیران مقطع متوسطه آموزش‌وپرورش استان خراسان جنوبی دارد. بنابراین؛ بر مبنای یافته‌های حاصل از این پژوهش، به‌منظور برنامه‌ریزی براي بهبود فرايند توسعه حرفه‌ای مدیران در آينده، در گام اول؛ می‌بایست مؤلفه‌های سازمانی موردتوجه قرار گيرد.
The purpose of this study was identifying factors affecting the professional development of school principal’s futures study approach. This research, based on the purpose, following the applied research and based on the nature of the research, is an explanation that has done by the combined method and sequential explanatory design. In this study using purposive sampling method (18 people) and were studied The views and perspectives of the managers of the education staff of South Khorasan province in relation to the factors affecting the future professional development of school managers. Then, for the confirmation of the dimensions specified in the research, a researcher-made questionnaire was distributed among 201 principals and deputies of secondary schools in South Khorasan province. The validity of the measurement tool has confirmed in the qualitative part using the coders' agreement method and in the quantitative part through convergent and divergent validity. In addition, the reliability of the researcher-made questionnaire has evaluated based on three criteria: factor load coefficients, Cronbach's alpha (0.81) and combined reliability (0.87) using PLS software. To test the research questions, MAXQDA10 software and PLS3 software were used. The results of the qualitative part of the research showed 39 basic themes, 6 organizing themes and 3 comprehensive themes. The results of the quantitative part of the research showed that the factors affecting the professional development of schools in the future could be classified form of three dimensions (individual, organizational and environmental) and 6 components (managerial, communication, behavioral, psychological, religious, environmental and contextual factors) and 39 indicators. The most important dimension came out to be organizational, which has a more effective role in explaining the professional development of secondary education managers in South Khorasan province. Therefore; based on the findings of this study, in order to planning for improving professional development of managers in the future, the first step; must consider the organizational components
1. Organ DW, Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB. Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Sage Publications; 2005 Jun 15.
2. Hiltrop, J. The Accidental Manager: Surviving the Transition from Professional to Manager. Prentice Hall Europe.2007.
3. Pourmohammadi M R, Naimi K, Iranian A.Evaluation and Formulation of Sustainable Tourism Development Strategies Using SWOT and IEATechniques" (Case Study: Baneh County). Urban Tourism, 2015; 2(3): 319-305.
4. Sprott RA. Factors that foster and deter advanced teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2019 Jan 1; 77:321-31.
5. Brown C, Militello M. Principal’s perceptions of effective professional development in schools. Journal of educational administration. 2016 Sep 5.
6. Potter I, Chitpin S. Professional development for school leaders in England: decision-making for social justice. Professional Development in Education. 2021 Jan 1; 47(1):63-74.
7. Ibara EC. Professional development of principals: A path to effective secondary school administration in Nigeria. Africa Education Review. 2014 Oct 2; 11(4):674-89.
8. Gurr D, Drysdale L. Middle-level secondary school leaders: Potential, constraints and implications for leadership preparation and development. Journal of Educational Administration. 2013 Jan 25; 51(1):55-71.
9. Pashiardis P, Brauckmann S. Evaluation of school principals. In International handbook on the preparation and development of school leaders 2009 May 7 (pp. 281-297). Routledge.
10. Maiden B, Kinsey S. Issues of control and conformity: Constructing identity through continuous Professional development. In7th International Conference on HRD Research and Practice across Europe 2006.
11. Desimone LM. Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational researcher. 2009 Apr; 38(3):181-99.
12. Pitts DW. Leadership, empowerment, and public organizations. Review of Public Personnel Administration. 2005 Mar; 25(1):5-28.
13. Filiz O, Yurdakul IK, İzmirli ÖŞ. Changes in professional development needs of faculty members according to stages of technology use and field differences. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013 Oct 21; 93:1224-8.
14. Sparks D, Loucks-Horsley S. Five models of staff development. Journal of staff development. 1989; 10(4):40-57.
15. Gaible E, Burns M. Using Technology to Train Teachers: Appropriate Uses of ICT for Teacher Professional Development in Developing Countries. Online Submission. 2005.
16. Mohd Tahir L, Berhandden Musah M, Ali MF, Abdullah AH, Hamzah MH. Principals’ views on continuing professional development programmes: Evidence from Malaysia. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. 2021 Feb 3:1741143221988953.
17. Mori I. 2nd survey of schools ICT in education: Spain country report. Study. 2019;15.
18. Update OO. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2017. Links. 2017.
19. Steeg SM, Lambson D. Collaborative professional development: One school's story. The Reading Teacher. 2015 Mar; 68(6):473-8.
20. Kennedy E, Shiel G. Raising literacy levels with collaborative on‐site professional development in an urban disadvantaged school. The Reading Teacher. 2010 Feb; 63(5):372-83.
21. Boone E, Hartzman M, Mero D. A collaborative approach to performance. Principal Leadership (Middle School Edition). 2006; 6(10):31-4.
22. Mishra P, Koehler MJ. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record. 2006 Jun; 108(6):1017-54.
23. Lee HJ. Developing a Professional Development Program Model Based on Teachers' Needs. Professional educator. 2005; 27:39-49.
24. Putnam RT, Borko H. What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational researcher. 2000 Jan; 29(1):4-15.
25. Karacabey MF. School Principal Support in Teacher Professional Development. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management. 2021 Jan 16; 9(1):54-75.
26. Reston VA. National Policy Board for Educational Administration. Professional Standards for Educational Leaders, American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education. 2015.
27. Militello M, Fusarelli B, Alsbury T, Warren TP. How professional standards guide practice for school principals. International journal of educational management. 2013 Jan 11.
28. Ng SW, Chan TM. Continuing professional development for middle leaders in primary schools in Hong Kong. Journal of Educational Administration. 2014 Aug 26.
29. Kanokorn S, Pongtorn P, Ngang TK. Collaborative action professional development of school principals. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014 Feb 21; 116:77-81.
30. Bizzell BE. Professional development of school principals in the rural Appalachian region of Virginia (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech), 2011.
31. Galaviz P. Principals' perceptions of their own professional development (Doctoral dissertation), 2019.
32. Grasley-Boy N, Gage NA, MacSuga-Gage AS. Multitiered support for classroom management professional development. Beyond Behavior. 2019 Apr; 28(1):5-12.
33. Wallace MR. Making sense of the links: Professional development, teacher practices, and student achievement. Teachers college record. 2009 Feb 1; 111(2):573-96.
34. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research. Sage publications; 1990.
35. Hulland J. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic management journal. 1999 Feb; 20(2):195-204.
36. Abili K, Hajkhozeymh M, Pourkarimi J, Hatami M. Identifying the Components of Professional Development of Universities Departments Chairs and Higher Education Institutions (A meta-synthesis study). Journal of Research on Management of Teaching in Marine Sciences. 2020 Apr 20; 7(1):1-8.
37. Pourkarimi J, Farzaneh M, Azizi M, Kordi E. Designing a Professional Competencies Model for Educational Departments’ Heads in University of Tehran. Higher Education Letter. 2016 Sep 1; 9(34):149-70.
38. Arbabi Sarjoo A. Analysis Comparative Chairpersons Competencies Evaluation and University of Sistan and Baluchistan (USB) and Zahedan University of Medical Sciences (ZUMS) Based on 360-Degree Feedback Model. (Doctoral dissertation), 2011.
39. Keim MC, Murray JP. Chief academic officers' demographics and educational backgrounds. Community College Review. 2008 Oct; 36(2):116-32.
40. Rich EC, Magrane D, Kirch DG. Qualities of the medical school dean: insights from the literature. Academic Medicine. 2008 May 1; 83(5):483-7.
41. Cochran GR. Ohio State University Extension competency study: Developing a competency model for a 21st century Extension organization.2009.
42. Souba W, Notestine M, Way D, Lucey C, Yu L, Sedmak D. Do deans and teaching hospital CEOs agree on what it takes to be a successful clinical department chair? Academic Medicine. 2011 Aug 1; 86(8):974-81.
43. Schwinghammer TL, Rodriguez TE, Weinstein G, Sorofman BA, Bosso JA, Kerr RA, Haden NK. AACP strategy for addressing the professional development needs of department chairs.2012.
44. Mallon WT, Grigsby RK. Top Skills, Attributes, and Behaviors. Critical for success. AAMC successful medical school Department chair series. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges on press. (Code42). 2016.
45. Bharwani A, Kline T, Patterson M. A stakeholder‐based approach to leadership development training: the case of medical education in Canada. International Journal of Training and Development. 2017 Sep; 21(3):211-23.
46. Fields J, Kenny NA, Mueller RA. Conceptualizing educational leadership in an academic development program. International Journal for Academic Development. 2019 Jul 3; 24(3):218-31.
47. Wisniewski MA. Leadership Development for Academic Chairs: Programs for Promoting Competence in Higher Education. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education. 2019 Jan 2; 67(1):48-51.
48. Goodarzi; M R, Soltani; I. Presenting a model of competency indicators of managers in educational organizations (Case study: Payame Noor University). Sociological Association of Education.2018; (7): 131-109.
49. Bates CS. Academic Leaders' Perspectives on the Impact of Change in Higher Education on Leadership Development and the Faculty Governance Model. Indiana Wesleyan University; 2018.
50. Nolan-Arañez SI, Ludvik MB. Positing a framework for cultivating spirituality through public university leadership development. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. 2018 Jun 4.
51. Gast I, Schildkamp K, van der Veen JT. Team-based professional development interventions in higher education: A systematic review. Review of educational research. 2017 Aug; 87(4):736-67.
52. Evans L. University professors as academic leaders: Professorial leadership development needs and provision. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. 2017 Jan; 45(1):123-40.
53. Sirkis JE. A theoretical model for designing an in-house community college department chair professional development program (Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland University College).2013.