The Relationship Research of Transformational Leadership and School Teachers’ Organizational Commitment:A Mediating Effect of Teachers’ Self-efficacy
-
摘要: 为研究校长变革型领导力对教师组织承诺的直接影响，以及教师自我效能感在影响机制中的中介效应，本论文以多省市520名教师为对象，设计了校长变革型领导力、教师自我效能感、教师组织承诺三个量表，运用Amos23.0构建结构方程模型探索变量间作用机制，结合Bootstrap引入教师自我效能感这一中介变量进行验证分析。结果表明：校长变革型领导力、教师自我效能感对教师组织承诺都具有显著的积极影响；变革型领导力对教师自我效能感具有显著的积极影响；教师自我效能感在校长变革型领导力对教师组织承诺的影响关系中起到中介作用，即校长的变革型领导力部分通过教师的自我效能感对教师的组织承诺产生影响。Abstract: In order to study the direct impact of the transformational leadership of the principal on the organizational commitment level of teachers and the mediating effect of teachers’ self-efficacy in the impact mechanism, the transformational leadership and teacher self-efficacy were designed for 520 high school teachers from many provinces and cities. By using AMOS 23.0,we construct a structural equation model to explore the mechanism of interaction between variables, combined with Bootstrap to introduce the teacher self-efficacy as a mediator variable for the empirical analysis. The analysis results show that the principal’s transformational leadership and teacher’s self-efficacy have a significant positive impact on teacher’s organizational commitment; teacher’s self-efficacy plays a partial intermediary role in the relationship between the principal’s transformational leadership and the teacher’s organizational commitment. The principal's transformational leadership influences teachers’ organizational commitment by affecting teachers’ self-efficacy.
-
表 1 题项分布表
量表 维度 项目 背景问卷 性别、年龄、婚姻、教龄、学历、职称、职务、学校规模 1~8 校长变革型领导力问卷 德行垂范 9~13 愿景激励 14~18 领导魅力 19~23 个性化关怀 24~28 教师自我效能感问卷 教师效能感 29~39 教师组织承诺问卷 感情承诺 40~43 规范承诺 44~47 理想承诺 48~51 投入承诺 52~55 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 变革型领导力、教师自我效能感及组织承诺问卷的信效度
观测值 校长变革型领导力问卷 教师自我效能感问卷 教师组织承诺问卷 信度 Cronbach’s Alpha系数 0.947 0.915 0.931 效度 KMO值 0.925 0.951 0.963 Bartlett球形检验P值 0.000 0.000 0.000 累积方差解释率 84.445% 79.239% 80.284% 因子载荷值 0.669~0.913 0.793~0.858 0.521~0.890
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 模型标准路径系数表
路径关系 标准路径系数 标准误差 临界比 显著性P 教师自我效能感 <--- 校长变革型领导力 0.562 0.046 9.539 *** 教师组织承诺 <--- 校长变革型领导力 0.701 0.048 13.02 *** 教师组织承诺 <--- 教师自我效能感 0.396 0.05 6.937 *** 注：***表示P值小于0.001，为极显（显著性水平为0.05）。
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 自我效能感的标准化间接影响作用
个性化关怀 领导魅力 愿景激励 德行垂范 自我效能感 投入承诺 理想承诺 规范承诺 感情承诺 自我效能感 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 投入承诺 0.032 −0.037 0.058 0.046 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 理想承诺 0.044 −0.056 0.084 0.062 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 规范承诺 0.062 −0.079 0.122 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 感情承诺 0.071 −0.090 0.112 0.108 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 自我效能感标准化间接影响作用显著性
个性化关怀 领导魅力 愿景激励 德行垂范 自我效能感 投入承诺 理想承诺 规范承诺 感情承诺 自我效能感 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 投入承诺 0.113 0.022 0.014 0.026 ... ... ... ... ... 理想承诺 0.092 0.003 0.002 0.005 ... ... ... ... ... 规范承诺 0.104 0.003 0.002 0.006 ... ... ... ... ... 感情承诺 0.091 0.003 0.001 0.008 ... ... ... ... ...
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 陈文晶, 时勘. (2007). 变革型领导和交易型领导的回顾与展望. 管理评论,(09),22−29. [2] 库泽斯、波斯纳、戴启思等. (2014). 领导力: 如何在组织中成就卓越(亚洲版)（陈文芳等译）, 北京: 电子工业出版社. [3] 李超平, 时勘. (2005). 变革型领导的结构与测量. 心理学报,37(6),803−811. [4] 凌文栓, 张治灿, 方俐洛. (2000). 中国职工组织承诺的结构模型研究. 管理科学学报,3(2),76−80. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1007-9807.2000.02.012 [5] 庞丽娟, 洪秀敏. (2005). 教师自我效能感: 教师自主发展的重要内在动力机制. 教师教育研究,(04),43−46. [6] 时晨晨. (2019). 校长该如何进行教学领导?. 人民教育,(8),8. [7] 宋爱红, 蔡永红. (2005). 教师组织承诺结构的验证性因素分析. 心理发展与教育,21(2),48−51. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4918.2005.02.009 [8] 托马斯•J.萨乔万尼. (2002). 道德领导抵及学校改善的核心（ 冯大鸣译）. 上海: 上海教育出版社. [9] 吴量, 詹浩洋. (2017). 中文版教师自我效能感量表(TSE)(简版)的信度和效度研究. 心理技术与应用,5(11),672−679. [10] 辛涛, 申继亮, 林崇德. (1994). 教师自我效能感与学校因素关系的研究. 教育研究,(10),16−20. [11] Bandura, A. (2006). Adolescent development from an agentic perspective. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, 5, 1−43. [12] Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1996). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, , 121−126. [13] Bass, B. M. (1995). Theory of transformational leadership redux. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(4), 463−478. doi: 10.1016/1048-9843(95)90021-7 [14] Burns J M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row. [15] Guskey, T. R. (1987). Context variables that affect measures of teacher efficacy. The Journal of educational research, 81(1), 41−47. doi: 10.1080/00220671.1987.10885795 [16] Jing, L., & Zhang, D. (2014). The mediation of performance in the relationship of organizational commitment to university faculty’s effectiveness. Asia Pacific Education Review, 15(1), 141−153. doi: 10.1007/s12564-013-9309-2 [17] Leithwood, K. A. (1992). The move toward transformational leadership. Educational Leadership, 49(5), 8−12. [18] Leithwood, K., Begley, P. T., & Cousins, J. B. (1994). Developing Expert Leadership for Future Schools, (11): 331. [19] Leithwood, K., & Others, A. (1993). Secondary school teachers’ commitment to change: the contributions of transformational leadership., 62(62), 66−74. [20] Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human resource management review, 1(1), 61−89. doi: 10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z [21] Mohammed S. I., Simin G. S., Saedah Siraj M. K. (2014). Can transformational leadership influence on teachers’commitment towards organization, teaching profession, and students learning? A quantitative analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 15(2), 177−190. doi: 10.1007/s12564-013-9308-3 [22] Newmann, F. M., Rutter, R. A., & Smith, M. S. (1989). Organizational factors that affect school sense of efficacy, community, and expectations. Sociology of education, , 221−238. [23] Silins H, Mulford B. (2002). Leadership and School Results: Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration. Berlin: Springer Netherlands, (02), 561−612. [24] Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783−805. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1 -
点击查看大图
图(1) / 表(6)
计量
- 文章访问数: 337
- HTML全文浏览量: 647
- PDF下载量: 45
- 被引次数: 0