Does Public Leadership Improve School Effectiveness through Strengthening Teacher Professionalism?

Does Public Leadership Improve School Effectiveness through Strengthening Teacher Professionalism?

Purpose: This study was conducted to investigate themediating role of teacher professionalism in therelationship between public leadership behaviours ofadministrators in public schools and schooleffectiveness.Method: The present study was designed in acorrelational research model and conducted with 482teachers working in public schools. Simple randomsampling was used in this study. The data werecollected using Public Leadership Scale, SchoolEffectiveness Index and Teacher ProfessionalismScale. With this regard, the mediator role of teacherprofessionalism in the relationship between publicleadership and school effectiveness was determinedusing path analysis.Findings: The results of the study indicated that public leadership has a direct and indirectimpact on school effectiveness by enhancing teacher professionalism.Implications for Research and Practice: Given those school principals working at publicschools raise awareness of the concepts brought about the new understanding of publicmanagement is considered necessary, teacher professionalism should be contributed withinthe framework of public leadership, and school effectiveness should be sustained.

___

  • Abdurrezzak, S. (2015). Explore of teachers’ perceptions on effective school and school leadership.[Unpublished master’s thesis].Cumhuriyet University, Sivas.
  • Ainley, J., & Carstens, R. (2018). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 Conceptual Framework. OECD Education Working Papers. No. 187, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/799337c2-en
  • Akhan, A. (2009). Expectations of parents of private primany schools and levels of expectations: The sample of İstanbul in Eurapoen side.[ Unpublished master’s thesis].Yeditepe University, İstanbul.
  • Arslan, H., Satıcı, A., & Kuru, M. (2007). A comparison of cultural and efficiency levels in state and private primary schools. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice 51, 371-394.
  • Arslantas, I., & Ozkan, M. (2014). Defining qualities of school administrators in effective schools from teachers and administrators point of view. International Journal of Social Science, 26, 181-193.
  • Aydoğan, E. (2008). Eğitim sisteminde yeniden yapılanma ve özelleştirme adımları. Memleket Siyaset Yönetim, 3(6), 166-187.
  • Ayik, A. & Ada, S. (2009). The relationship between the effectiveness of schools and the school culture which is created in primary schools. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 429-446.
  • Baron,R.,M.&Kenny, D.A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182
  • Boonla, D., & Treputtharat, S. (2014). The relationship between the leadership style and school effectiveness in school under the Office of secondary education area 20. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112, 991-996.
  • Brookes, S, (2011). Crisis confidence and collectivity: Responding to the new public leadership challenge. Leadership, 72(2), 175-194.
  • Broussine, M., & Callahan R. F. (2016). Public management and governance.Public leadership. In T. Bovaird and E. Loeffler (Eds.),New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Multivariate applications series.Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Cansoy, R., & Parlar, H. (2017). Okul gelişiminin bir yordayıcısı olarak öğreten profesyonalizmi. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 269-289.
  • Carlgren, I. (1999). Professionalism and teachers as designers. Journal of Curriculum Studies 31(1), 43-56.
  • Cerit, Y. (2012). The Relationship between bureaucratic school structure and classroom teachers’ professional behaviours. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 18(4), 497-521.
  • Cerit, Y., & Yildirim, B. (2017). The relationship between primary school principals’ effective leadership behaviours and school effectiveness. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(3), 902-914.
  • Coleman, J. S., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Report Number 0e-36001. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED012275.pdf
  • Cobanoglu, F., & Badavan, Y. (2016). The key of successful schools: The correlates of school effectiveness. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 26:114-134.
  • Cokgezen, M., & Terzi, N. (2008). Türkiye'de devletin eğitime müdahalesinin yeterli gerekçesi var mı? Liberal Düşünce, 49(13), 3-24.
  • Cubukcu, Z., & Girmen, P. (2006). Levels of effectiveness characteristics in secondary schools. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16: 121-136.
  • Dean, S. D. (2011). Collegial leadership, teacher professionalısm, faculty trust: Predicting teacher academic optimism in elementary schools. [Unpublished doctoral thesis] ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis.
  • DeHart-Davis, L. (2009). Green tape: A theory of effective organizational rules.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 361–84.
  • Demirkasımoglu, N. (2010). Defining “teacher professionalism” from different perspectives. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 9, 2047–2051.
  • Demirkasimoglu, N., & Taskin, P. (2015). Relationship between talent management and organizational effectiveness: The case of private schools. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 4(4), 268-285.
  • Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(1), 15-24.
  • Erdag, C., & Karadag, E. (2017). School accountability models: A holistic review. Turkish Journal of Business Ethics, 10(2), 330-341.
  • European Commission. (2012). Developing key competences at school in Europe: Challenges and opportunities for policy. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  • European Commission. (2018). European ideas for better learning: the governance of school education systems. The final report and thematic outputs of the ET2020 Working Groups Schools (2016 – 2018).
  • Evans, L. (2011). The ‘shape’ of teacher professionalism in England: Professional standards, performance management, professional development and the changes proposed in the 2010 White Paper. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 851-87.
  • Fernandez, S. (2005). Developing and testing an integrative framework of public sector leadership: Evidence from the public education arena. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(2), 197–217.
  • Furlong, J. (2001). Reforming teacher education, re-forming teachers: accountability, professionalism and competence. In R. Philip and J. Furlong (Eds.), Education reform and the state: Twentyfive years of politics, policy and practice (pp.118-135). London: Routledge Falmer.
  • Goldspink, C. (2007). Rethinking educational reform: A loosely coupled and complex systems perspective. Educational Management Administration Leadership 35(1), 27-50.
  • Gong, B. (2002). Designing school accountability systems: Towards a framework and process. ERIC ID: ED46441
  • Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125 – 142.
  • Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2014). Modeling the longitudinal effects of school leadership on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(5), 653-681.
  • Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3-15.
  • Hildebrandt, S. A., & Eom, M. (2011). Teacher professionalization: Motivational factors and the influence of age. Teaching and Teacher Education 27(2), 416-423.
  • Hofman, W. H. A., & Hofman, R. H. (2011). Smart management in effective schools: effective management configurations in general and vocational education in the Netherlands. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(4), 620-645.
  • Hopkins, D. (2001). School improvement for real. London: Routledge Falmer.
  • Hoque, K. E., Alam, G. M., & Abdullah, A. G. K. (2011). Impact of teachers’ professional development on school improvement: An analysis at Bangladesh standpoint. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(3), 337-348.
  • Hoy, W. K. (2009). School effectiveness index. http://www.waynekhoy.com/ pdfs/ School_Effectiveness_Index.pdf
  • Polcyn, J. (2015). Education as a public good. Вісник Бердянського університету менеджменту і бізнесу, 1(29), 32-35.
  • Ilgar, L. (2014). The point of views of classroom teachers who worked both at private and state schools on the differences in classroom management: A qualitative study. HAYEF: Journal of Education 11(22), 259-285.
  • Kantos, Z. E., & Balcı, A. (2011) An accountability model for public and private primary schools through the perceptions of primary school teachers and administrators. Educational Sciences and Practice, 10(20), 107-138.
  • Karagoz, Y. (2016). SPSS 23 ve AMOS 23 uygulamalı istatiksel analizler (1. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Kaya, Y. (2015). Effective school development according to the views of school sharers (The case of Şahinbey). [Unpablished master thesis], Hasan Kalyoncu University, İstanbul.
  • Keskin, H. D., & Turna, G. B. (2010). Ailelerin devlet ya da özel okul tercihlerini etkileyen faktörler (Rize Örneği). Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(2), 411 – 426.
  • Kilinc, A. C. (2014). School culture as a predictor of teacher professionalism. Education and Science, 39(174), 105-118.
  • Kilinc, A. C., CemalogluCemaloglu, N., & Savaş, G. (2015). The relationship between teacher leadership, teacher professionalism, and perceived stress. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 58, 1-26.
  • Kincheloe, J. L. (2004). The knowledge of teacher education: Developing a critical complex epistemology. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31, 49-66.
  • Kober, N. (2007). Why we still need public schools: Public education for the common good. Center on Education Policy, Washington, DC.
  • Kosar, S. (2015). Trust in school principal and self-efficacy as predictors of teacher professionalism. Education and Science,40(181), 255-270.
  • Krasnoff, B. (2015). Leadership qualities of effective principals. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cc91/c89f4d6016725af76e50fd41dbd4d035f bbe.pdf
  • Kusaksiz, N. (2010). The levels of primary schools that have effective school characteristics according to teachers' views (Sample of Üsküdar county). [Unpblished master thesis] Selcuk University.
  • Lane, J. E. (1994). Will public management drive out public administration? Asian Journal of Public Administration, 16(2), 139–51.
  • Leithwood, K., & Earl, L. (2000). Educational accountability effects: An international perspective. Peabody Journal of Education 75(4), 1-18.
  • Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 201-227.
  • Levine, A. (2006). Educating school teachers. Washington, DC: Education Schools Project. www.edschools.org/teacher_report.htm.
  • Lezotte, L. W. (1991). Correlates of effective schools: The first and second generation. Okemos, MI: Effective Schools Products, Ltd.
  • Lezotte, L. W. (2001). Revolutionary and evolutionary: The effective schools movement. https://docplayer.net/13354282-Revolutionary-and-evolutionary-theeffective-schools-movement-dr-lawrence-w-lezotte.html
  • Louis, K. S., Dretzke, B., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010). How does leadership affect student achievement? Results from a national US survey. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(3), 315-336.
  • Mattar, D. M. (2012). Factors affecting the performance of public schools in Lebanon. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(2), 252-263.
  • Memduhoğlu, H. B., & Karataş, E. (2017). Öğretmenlere göre çalıştıkları okullar ne kadar etkili? Journal of Educational Sciences Research,7(2), 227-244.
  • MoNE. (2019). National education statistic 2018-2019. https://sgb.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2019_09/30102730_meb_istatistikl eri_orgun_egitim_2018_2019.pdf
  • OECD. (2013). Education policy outlook: Turkey. http://www.oecd.org/education/ EDUCATION%20POLICY%20OUTLOOK%20TURKEY_EN.pdf
  • OECD. (2016a). Supporting Teacher Professionalism: Insights from TALIS 2013.” TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264248601-en
  • OECD. (2016b). Teaching in focus. TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://read.oecdilibrary.org/education/teacher-professionalism_5jm3xgskpc40-en#page1
  • OECD. (2018a). OECD school user survey: Improving learning spaces together. http://www.oecd.org/education/OECD-School-User-Survey-2018.pdf
  • OECD. (2018b). Effective Teacher Policies: Insights from PISA. PISA, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301603-en
  • Özdemir, M. (2011). Kamu yönetimi ve işletme yönetimi arakesitinde bir bilim: Eğitim yönetimi. Amme İdaresi Dergisi 44(2), 29-42.
  • Ozdemir, M., & Bozkurt, S. (2015). Educational and school administrators’ opinions on the new public management approach. Marmara University Atatürk Education Faculty Journal of Educational Sciences 42, 317-334.
  • Ozdemir, N. (2019). Principal leaderhip and students’ achievement: Mediated pathways of professional community and teachers’ instructional practices. KJEP 16(1), 81-104.
  • Ozmen, I., & Sentürk, I. (2018). The relationship between Bolman and Deal's four framework theory of leadership and organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Leadership Studies: Theory and Practices 1(1), 29-51.
  • Parlar, H. (2006). Velilerin özel okul tercihlerini etkileyen faktörler ve özel okulların durumu: Kahramanmaraş örneği.[Unpublished master thesis]. Yeditepe University,İstanbul.
  • Poekert, P. E. (2012). Teacher leadership and professional development: Examining links between two concepts central to school improvement. Professional Development in Education, 38(2), 169-188.
  • Reagle, C. (2006). Creating effective schools where all students can learn. Rural Educator, 27(3), 24-33.
  • Reynolds, D., Sammons, P., De Fraine, B., Van Damme, J., Townsend, T., Teddlie, C., & Stringfield, S. (2014). Educational effectiveness research (EER): A state-of-theart review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 197-230.
  • Rizvi, M. (2008). The role of school principals in enhancing teacher professionalism. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(1), 85-100.
  • Rizvi, M., & Elliot, B. (2005). Teachers' perceptions of their professionalism in government primary schools in Karachi, Pakistan. Asia - Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 33(1), 35.
  • Robinson, M. (2015). From old public administration to the new public service: Implications for public sector reform in developing countries. UNDP, Global Centre for Public Service Excellence.
  • Uysal, B. S. (2017). Investigation of the reasons for preference of private school for the parents (İstanbul example). [Unpublished master thesis]. Marmara University, İstanbul.
  • Wardoyo, H., Herdiani, A., & Sulikah, S. (2017). Teacher professionalism: Analysis of professionalism phases. International Education Studies, 10(4), 90-100.
  • Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Hämäläinen, S., Sarja, A., Kimonen, E., & Nevalainen, R. (2004). A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in England and Finland. Comparative Education, 40(1), 83-107.
  • Whitaker, B. (1997). Instructional leadership and principal visibility. Clearing House, 70(3), 155-157.
  • Witziers, B., Bosker, R., & Kruger, M. (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39:398-425.
  • Yaslioğlu, M. M. (2017). Factor analysis and validity in social sciences: Application of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business 46, Special Issue, 74-85.