[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 10, Issue 1 (4-2021) ::
MEO 2021, 10(1): 173-209 Back to browse issues page
Criteria for evaluating technology leaders in schools: Mixed research
Abbas Hossiny , Farhad Seraji, Mohammad Reza Yousefzadeh Chosari
Ph.D. Student of Curriculum Development, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Bu-Ali -Sina University, Hamadan, Iran.
Abstract:   (385 Views)
The goal of this research was to extract criteria for evaluating technology leaders and it was conducted by mixed method.  The research method was descriptive in the qualitative part and survey method in the quantitative part.  The research was carried out in smart and semi-smart  primary schools in Zanjan province in the academic year of 1398-99. Participants of the qualitative part were fifteen principals from smart schools who were selected using the criterion sampling method considering the principle of theoretical saturation. In the quantitative part, the statistical population included 228 smart and semi-smart school principals in Zanjan province. According to Krejcie and Morgan Table, 139 principals were selected as a research sample by relative stratified random sampling. In the qualitative part, Data collection tools were Semi-structured interviews and in quantitative one, a researcher-made questionnaire was developed. The validity of this questionnaire was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. Its reliability was obtained by calculating Cronbach's alpha coefficient for 0.83. . The method of analysis in the qualitative part was content analysis. According to content analysis, 6 main components including planning, organizing, leadership, control, educational and physical factors and 30 criteria for evaluating school technology leaders were identified. The validity of the components was calculated to be 0.88 using CVR. In quantitative part, descriptive statistics and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test Single group T and T in correlated groups were used to analyze the data. The results showed that the status of the evaluation components of school technology leaders was higher than the average in the planning component and physical factors. It was higher than average in the component of leadership, organization, and control and educational factors. In general, the components were higher than the average. Therefore, criteria can be used to evaluate school technology leaders.
Keywords: Evaluation, ICT Integration, Technology Leadership and Criterion
Full-Text [PDF 543 kb]   (161 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: managing education in education
Received: 2021/01/23 | Accepted: 2021/04/15 | Published: 2021/04/30
1. Abdullah, N., Khalid, H., & Hamzah, M. I. M. (2015). The practice of technology leadership in ICT integration at national secondary schools in Malaysia [Conference session]. Proceeding of the 3rd Global Summit on Education GSE 2015, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
2. Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M. & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102(2020), 67-86. [DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004]
3. Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. L. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49-82. [DOI:10.1177/0013161X04269517]
4. Bailey, G.D. (1997). What technology leaders need to know: The essential top 10 concepts for technology integration in the 21st century? Learning & Leading with Technology, 25(1), 57-62.
5. Bailey, G.D., Lumley, D. (1994). Technology staff development programs. A leadership sourcebook for school administrators. Scholastic, New York.
6. Banoğlu, K. (2011). Principals' Technology Leadership Competency and Technology Coordinator ship. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(1), 208-213.
7. Bridges, J.W.(2003). Principal influence: Sustaining a vision for powerful new forms of learning using technology. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles,
8. Celep, C., & Tülübaş, T. (2014). Effect of principals' technological leadership on teachers' attitude towards the use of educational technologies. In IFIP Conference on Information Technology in Educational Management (pp. 247-258). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-662-45770-2_21]
9. Chang, I.(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 .
10. Chang, I., & Tseng, D. (2005). The development of technology leadership academies in the USA and from which some implications for school administration in Taiwan. Journal of the National Institute for Complication and Translation, 33(3), 83-95.
11. Davies, P.M. (2010). On school educational technology leadership. Management in Education, 24(2), 55-61. [DOI:10.1177/0892020610363089]
12. Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2010). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications. Routledge. docs/pdfs/nets-a-standards.pdf. [DOI:10.4324/9780203846544]
13. Elsa, M., & Kobus, M. (2003). Managing technology integration into schools: a South African perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 186-200. [DOI:10.1108/09578230310464684]
14. Fardanesh, H. (1390). Theoretical foundations of educational technology, Tehran: Samat Publications. [in Persian]
15. Fatemi Dokht, S.(2013). The role of factors affecting the acceptance of educational technology from the perspective of high school principals based on the Davis technology acceptance model. Master Thesis, Department of Educational Technology, Kharazmi University. [in Persian]
16. Flanagan, L. & Jacobsen, M. (2003). Technology leadership for the twenty-first century principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 124-142. [DOI:10.1108/09578230310464648]
17. Frazier, M., & Bailey, G. D. (2004). The technology coordinator's handbook. ISTE (Interntl Soc Tech Educ.
18. Ghafourian, H., Mohammad Taheri, M. (1397). Identification of affective Factors of e-learning in smart schools of Baharestan. Quarterly Journal of Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences,8(4(32)),41-70. [in Persian]
19. Ghorbani Shiroodi, M.(2011). Investigating organizational health and its relationship with management style of case study managers of Tehran Electricity Distribution Company. Master Thesis in Public Management, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch. [in Persian]
20. Gul, S. (2011). Critical Realism and Project Management: Revisiting the noumenal and phenomenal. African Journal of Business Management, 5(31), 12212-12221. [DOI:10.5897/AJBM11.741]
21. Gallivan, M., & Srite, M. (2005). Information technology and culture: Identifying fragmentary and holistic perspectives of culture. Information and organization, 15(4), 295-338. [DOI:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2005.02.005]
22. Gulpan, J. O., & Baja, R. M.(2020). Technological Leadership of 21 st Century Principals of Private Secondary Schools.
23. Gürfidan, H., & Koç, M. (2016). The Impact of School Culture, Technology Leadership, and Support Services on Teachers' Technology Integration: A Structural Equation Modeling. Education and Science, 41(188), 99-116. [DOI:10.15390/EB.2016.6722]
24. Hamzah, M. I. M., Juraime, F., Hamid, A. H. A., Nordin, N., & Attan, N. (2014). Technology leadership and its relationship with school-Malaysia Standard of Education Quality (SchoolMSEQ). International Education Studies, 7(13), 278-285. [DOI:10.5539/ies.v7n13p278]
25. Hero, J. L. (2020). Exploring the Principal's Technology Leadership: Its Influence on Teachers' Technological Proficiency. Online Submission, 4(6), 4-10.
26. Holland, L. & Steward, T. (2000). A different divide: preparing tech-savvy leaders. Leadership, 30(1), 81-89.
27. Hsieh, C. C., Yen, H. C., & Kuan, L. Y. (2014). The Relationship among Principals' Technology Leadership, Teaching Innovation, and Students' Academic Optimism in Elementary Schools. International Association for the Development of the Information Society.
28. Inkster, C.D.(1998). Technology leadership in elementary school principals: A comparative case study. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
29. International Society for Technology in Education. (2009). National education technology standards for administrators. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-a-standards.pdf.
30. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational technology standards for administrators, International Society for Technology in Education,
31. Jewell, M.J.(1998). The art and craft of technology leadership. Learning and Leading with Technology, 26(4), 46- 47.
32. Khorshidi, A; Malekshahi Rad, M.R. (2003). Educational evaluation, Tehran: Yastroon Publications. [in Persian]
33. Lawshe CH.(1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28, 563-575. [DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x]
34. 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. [DOI:10.1111/1467-8535.00266]
35. Lubis, M.A., Ariffin, S.R., Muhamad, T.A., Ibrahim, M.S., & Wekke, I.S. (2009). The Integration of ICT in the teaching and learning processes: A study on smart school of Malaysia. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Educational Technologies, Greece.
36. Mohaammadi,M; Jafari, S.(2011).The Relationship between Organizational Characteristics, Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes of High School Teachers and Their Confidence in Using ICT in Teaching. Journal of Teaching and Learning Studies, 4(1),105-136. [in Persian]
37. Mortazavi Aghdam ,P. Rahmani Neyshabour, R. Zareye Zavaraki, E.& Atashak M. (2012). Evaluation of Electronic Learning Contents. Journal of Technology Education. 7(1), 33-43 .
38. Mwawasi, F. M. (2014). Technology leadership and ICT use: Strategies for capacity building for ICT integration.
39. Nie, y. Tan, g. h., Liau, a, k., Lau, sh., Chua, b. l., (2013). The roles of teacher efficacy in instructional innovation: its predictive relations to constructivist and didactic instruction. Educ Res Policy Prac, 12(1), 67-77. [DOI:10.1007/s10671-012-9128-y]
40. Razak, N. A., Jalil, H. A., Krauss, S. E., & Ahmad, N. A. (2018). Successful implementation of information and communication technology integration in Malaysian public schools: An activity systems analysis approach. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58(2018), 17-29. [DOI:10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.05.003]
41. Saif, A. A. (2004). Educational measurement, assessment and evaluation. Tehran: Doran Publishing. [in Persian]
42. Saryazdi, A. (2011). Take a look at smart schools. Madrese roshdh farad, 7(53), 18-21. [in Persian]
43. Saud, M. S., et al. (2010). ICT application in Vocational and Technical Education and Training (VTET) Institutions in Malaysia. Proceedings of the International Conference on VTET Research and Networking, 23-24.
44. School smartening style (2011). Information and Communication Technology Statistics Center of the Ministry of Education of Iran. [in Persian]
45. Shyr, W. J. (2017). Developing the principal technology leadership competency indicators for technical high schools in K-12 in Taiwan. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2085-2093. [DOI:10.12973/eurasia.2017.01215a]
46. Sugar, W. (2005). Instructional technologist as a coach: impact of a situated professional development program on teachers' technology use. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 547-571.
47. Sugar, W., & Holloman, H. (2009). Technology leaders wanted: acknowledging the leadership role of a technology coordinator. TechTrends, 53(6), 66-75. [DOI:10.1007/s11528-009-0346-y]
48. Sugar,W. (2005). Instructional technologist as a coach: impact of a situated professional development program on teachers' technology use. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 547-571.
49. Technology standards for administrators. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/
50. Thannimalai, R., & Raman, A. (2019). Principals technology leadership and teachers technology integration in the 21st century classroom. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(2), 177-187.
51. Twomey, C., Shamburg, C., & Zieger, L. (2006). Teachers as technology leaders: A guide to ISTE technology facilitation and technology leadership accreditation. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
52. Unal, S., & Ozturk, I. H. (2012). Barriers to ITC integration into teachers' classroom practices: Lessons from a case study on social studies teachers in Turkey. World Applied Sciences Journal, 18(7), 939-944.
53. Valipour, H., Zeinabadi, H. R., Naveh ebrahim, A. K.(2016). Investigating the role of managers' technology leadership in accepting educational technology by smart school teachers in Tehran, Master Thesis in Educational Sciences, majoring in Educational Management. kharazmi University. [in Persian]
54. Weng, C. H., & Tang, Y. (2014). The relationship between technology leadership strategies and effectiveness of school administration: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 76(2014), 91-107. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.03.010]
55. Zaibi, D. E. N. (2018). Assessment of ICT integration into Special Education Schools in KPK, Province Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(3), 334-342. [DOI:10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i3/3933]
56. Zeinabadi, H. Reza & Mohammadvand Pir alQar, M. (2015). Principals as Technology Leaders: The Result of an Exploratory MixedStudy in Smart Schools of Tehran. Journal of Approaches in Educational Administration, 6 (4), 1-21. [in Persian].
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:


XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

hossiny A, seraji F, Yousefzadeh Chosari M R. Criteria for evaluating technology leaders in schools: Mixed research. MEO. 2021; 10 (1) :173-209
URL: http://journalieaa.ir/article-1-211-en.html

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 10, Issue 1 (4-2021) Back to browse issues page
نشریه مدیریت بر آموزش سازمان ها Journal of Managing Education in Organizations

Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.03 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4331