Document Type : Research

Authors

1 PhD Student, Department of Educational Management, Tehran North Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Communication Science, Amin Military science university, Tehran North Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Eslamshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Eslamshahr, Iran

4 Assistant Professor, Department of Higher education management, Tehran North Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

5 Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Damavand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The present study was conducted to present the technological leadership model of virtual education to promote primary school curricula with a combined approach. The research was a series of exploratory ones. The statistical population in the qualitative sector includes experts familiar with technological leadership. These individuals were purposefully selected for qualitative interviews on the subject of research (16 interviews with 16 people and continued to the point of theoretical saturation), and in the second (quantitative) part, a questionnaire was constructed among the primary school principals of the city, distributed in Tehran to 235 public school principals and 215 non-profit school principals. To analyze the coding in the qualitative part and the method of structural equations in the quantitative component was used. In the qualitative section, it was found that the categories were identified in the form of 9 types and 37 concept codes, and in the heart of the six dimensions of the paradigm model as causal causes (3 categories), the main category: virtual leadership technological education (1 category), strategies (1 Category), contextual conditions (1 category), intervening conditions (2 categories) and consequences (1 category) were included. In the quantitative part, it was found that all 6 main research components have a good fit. When selecting managers, relevant managers are advised to pay attention to their technological attitudes and capabilities.

Keywords

Main Subjects

زین­آبادی، حسن رضا و محمدوند پیرالقر، مریم (1394). مدیران به‌عنوان رهبران فناوری در مدرسه: یافته­های یک پژوهش ترکیبی اکتشافی در مدارس هوشمند شهر تهران. فصلنامه علمی ـ پژوهشی رهیافتی نو در مدیریت آموزشی، سال 6، شماره 4 (24)، 21-1.
سالم، شبنم. (1397). بررسی رابطه میزان استفاده از فناوری اطلاعات اعضای هیئت‌علمی با عملکرد آموزشی و پژوهشی آنان در دانشگاه تهران، یازدهمین کنفرانس بین‌المللی روانشناسی و علوم اجتماعی، تهران، شرکت همایشگران مهر اشراق.
رستگاری، نرجس و سالاری چینه، پروین،1399، شناسایی و تحلیل عوامل مؤثر در بهبود فرایند یاددهی – یادگیری دانشجو معلمان دانشگاه فرهنگیان با رویکرد آموزش مجازی با استفاده از مدل‌سازی ساختاری تفسیری (ISM)، دومین کنفرانس ملی یافته‌های نوین یاددهی-یادگیری در دوره ابتدایی، بندرعباس
عزیزی، مصطفی، ایزدی، صمد، بابائیان، فیروزه. (1399). بررسی موانع پذیرش و به‌کارگیری فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در مدارس ابتدایی. دوماهنامه علمی - پژوهشی رهیافتی نو در مدیریت آموزشی،11(41)؛ 117-134
شمس، غلامرضا، تاری، فرزانه، رضایی زاده، مرتضی. (1398). شناسایی موانع زیرساختی و مدیریتی به‌کارگیری آموزش الکترونیکی در آموزش منابع انسانی. تدریس پژوهی. 7(3)؛ 91-116 doi: 10.34785/J012.2019.981
Tenório, K., Dermeval, D., Monteiro, M., Peixoto, A., & Pedro, A. (2020, July). Raising teacher's empowerment in gamification design of adaptive learning systems: a qualitative research. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 524-536). Springer, Cham.
Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41 (1), 49-82.
Chang, I. H. (2012). The Effect of principals' technological leadership on teachers' technological literacy and teaching effectiveness in Taiwanese elementary schools. Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 328-340.
Chang, I. H., Chin, J. M., & Hsu, C. M. (2008). Teachers' perceptions of the dimensions and implementation of technology leadership of principals in Taiwanese elementary schools. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 229-245.
Chang, S., Kim, H., Song, J., & Lee, K. (2020). Technological Opportunity, Technological Leadership Change, and Latecomers’ R&D Resource Allocation between Innovation and Imitation. Technological Leadership Change, and Latecomers’ R&D Resource Allocation between Innovation and Imitation (February 14, 2020).
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design, choosing among five approaches, 2nd edition, California: Sage publication.
Dan, Zh. (2020). China adopts non-contact free consultation to help the public cope with the psychological pressure caused by new coronavirus pneumonia. Asian Journal of Psychiatry. Available online 10 April 2020, In Press.
Domingo, M. G., & Garganté, A. B. (2016). Exploring the use of educational technology in primary education: Teachers' perception of mobile technology learning impacts and applications' use in the classroom. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 21-28.
Giles, D. C. (2002). Advanced research methods in psychology: New York: Rout ledge.
Gladun, A., & Rogushina, J. (2008). An application of intelligent techniques and semantic web technologies in e-learning environments. An International Journal, 36 (2), 1922-1931.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Transaction Publishers.
Grady, M. L. (2011). Leading the technology-powered school. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gulpan, J. O., & Baja, R. M. Technological Leadership of 21 st Century Principals of Private Secondary Schools. Volume 4 Issue 4, April 2020.ijarp.org
Halili, S. H., & Sulaiman, H. (2018). Factors influencing the rural students' acceptance of using ICT for educational purposes. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences.
Heflin, H., Shewmaker, J., & Nguyen, J. (2017). Impact of mobile technology on student attitudes, engagement, and learning. Computers & Education, 107, 91-99.
Hero, J. L. (2020). Exploring the Principal's Technology Leadership: It's Influence on Teachers' Technological Proficiency. Online Submission, 4(6), 4-10.
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2009). National educational technology standards for administrators. Eugene, OR: Author.
Jackson, D. (2009). Relationship between principals' technological leadership and their schools' implementation of instructional technology. Doctoral dissertation. Georgia Southern University
Jones, A. (2004). A review of the research literature on barriers to the uptake of ICT by teachers. Coventry: Becta.
Kozloski, K. (2006). Principal leadership for technology integration: A study of principal technology leadership. Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation, Drexel University.
Littlejohn, A., Suckling, C., Campbell, L., & McNicol, D. (2002). The amazingly patient tutor: students’ interactions with an online carbohydrate chemistry course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 313-321.
Mustamin & Yasin, M. Al-Muz-zammil. (2012). the Competence of School Principals: What Kind of Need Competence for School Success? Journal of Education and Learning. Vol. 6 (1), 33-42.
Reston, V. A. (2015). National Policy Board for Educational Administration. Professional Standards for Educational Leaders. American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.
Safrankova J. M., & sikvr, M. (2018). Responsibilities and competencies in personnel management at Czech schools. Oeconomia Copernicana, 9 (3), 529–543.