Principal Leadership and Students' Modernity Development: A Case Study of Schools in Western China
-
摘要: 为探索校长不同领导方式对学生现代性发展的影响，提升西部学校的育人效能，该研究采用问卷法对西部学校进行了调查，并采用沃尔德曼等人的分层回归分析方法对校长变革型领导、交易型领导之于学生现代性的影响进行了比较。结果发现，校长变革型领导及其四个分维度—理想化影响、鼓舞干劲、智力激发及个性化关怀—对学生现代性都具有显著的预测作用。虽然交易型领导及其两个分维度—权变激励、例外管理—对学生现代性也具有预测作用，但变革型领导总体上更具优势。这要求西部中小学校长转变领导方式，提升变革型领导的意识与素养，更好地促进学生的现代化。Abstract: China is at the crucial period of modernization and more talents with high level of modernity are needed. In China's modernization process, western China is believed to the most difficult place as well as the niche point. Among all the factors affecting people's modernity development, school education is the most important. Students in compulsory schools are at the critical development period of their thoughts, ideas, attitudes and behaviors. Two thirds of their mental awakening time is spent in schools, and they are affected imperceptibly by their significant others in schools, including the principals and the teacher. A principal is the spiritual leader of a school, and his or her thought and ideological orientation reflected by their leadership styles affect the development of students' modernity.However, in the past studies, there were no conclusions regarding which leadership styles had more impact on students' modernity development. Using the cluster random sampling, this study investigated 378 teachers in 50 compulsory education schools from the provinces of Yunnan, Guizhou, Xinjiang, Guangxi and the city of Chongqing. All the variables were measured by teachers, including transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and students' modernity, as teachers are the intermediate actors between principals and students. Teachers are the best appraisers of principal leadership, as principal's cognitive behavior is directly shown in their leading process, which can be felt firsthand by teachers. Also teachers are closer to their students and familiar with their level of modernity. The data was collected and analyzed by the software of SPSS20.0 and AMOS20.0.The findings showed that both transformational leadership and its dimensions (r were between 0.373 and 0.579), transactional leadership and its dimensions (r were between 0.239 and 0.478) had significant relationships with students' modernity, but transformational leadership had closer ones. All the four dimensions of transformational leaderships, such as idealized influence (β=0.164, p < 0.05), inspirational motivation (β=0.253, p < 0.01), intellectual stimulation (β=0.159, p < 0.05), and individualized consideration (β=0.164, p < 0.05), had significant effects on students' modernity, all of which can explain 42.0% of the change in students' modernity. The two dimensions of transactional leadership, contingency motivation (β=0.388, p < 0.001) and exception management (β=0.185, p < 0.01) also had significant effects on students' modernity, both of which can explain 26.6% of the change in students' modernity. When the impact of transactional leadership was controlled, transformational leadership had significant and exceptional impact on students' modernity and all its dimensions. However, when the impact of transformational leadership was controlled, transactional leadership had no or less significant impact on students' modernity or its dimensions. These results showed that transformational leadership had more advantage than transactional leadership on affecting students' modernity.Based on the findings, it's suggested that principals should change their leadership styles, and strengthen their consciousness and transformational leadership in support of the development of students' modernity.
-
表 1 交易型领导与变革型领导的层次回归分析结果比较
学生现代性 学生现代性 模型1 模型2 模型3 模型4 模型5 模型6 第一步：人口学变量 第一步：人口学变量 性别 0.095 0.092 0.098* 性别 0.095 0.108* 0.098* 民族 -0.058 -0.090 -0.025 民族 -0.058 -0.018 -0.025 第二步：交易型领导 第二步：变革型领导 权变激励 0.388*** 0.060 理想化影响 0.164* 0.137 例外管理 0.185** 0.142* 鼓舞干劲 0.253** 0.279** 第三步：变革型领导 智力激发 0.159* 0.151* 理想化影响 0.137 个性化关怀 0.164* 0.024 鼓舞干劲 0.279* 第三步：交易型领导 智力激发 0.151* 权变激励 0.060 个性化关怀 0.024 例外管理 0.142* R2 0.010 0.276 0.442 R2 .010 0.430 0.442 校正后的R2 0.005 0.268 0.429 校正后的R2 .005 0.420 0.429 △R2 0.010 0.266 0.166 △R2 .010 0.420 0.012 △F 1.794 62.642*** 25.108*** △F 1.794 62.456*** 3.683* 
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 王树涛. 2015. 校长变革型领导对学生现代性的影响机制研究(博士学位论文). 北京师范大学, 北京. [2] 英格尔斯. 1985. 人的现代化: 心理·思想·态度·行为(殷陆君编译). 成都: 四川人民出版社. [3] 张新平.2008.校长角色转型研究—基于伯恩斯变革型领导理论的思考.教育发展研究, (5): 44-50. http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical_jyfzyj200805011.aspx [4] Bass B. M.1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York:Free Press. [5] Bass B. M., & Avolio B. J.1996. Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA:Consulting psychologists press. [6] Burns J. M.1978. Leadership. New York:Harper & Row. [7] Cameron K. S., & Ulrich D. O. 2000. Transformational leadership in colleges and universities. Smart J. C. "Higher education:Handbook of Theory and research", New York:Agathon Press. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274082715_Promoting_VET... [8] MacKenzie S. B., Podsakoff P. M., & Rich G. A. 2000. Transformational and transactional leadership and salesperson performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2000, 29(2): 115-134. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Scott_Mackenzie8/publication/... [9] Waldman D. A., Bass B.M., & Yammarino J. 1990. Adding to contingent-reward behavior: the augmenting effect of charismatic leadership. Group and organizational studies, 15(4): 381-394. doi: 10.1177/105960119001500404 -
