The purpose of this study is to explore the development direction for effective participation in school decision-making. The study analyze the zone of acceptance and participation level of elementary school teachers in school decision-making and set t...
The purpose of this study is to explore the development direction for effective participation in school decision-making. The study analyze the zone of acceptance and participation level of elementary school teachers in school decision-making and set the following research questions:
First, what is the zone of acceptance of elementary school teachers for school decision-making?
Second, what is the participation level of elementary school teachers in school decision-making?
Third, what is the participation level according to the zone of acceptance of elementary school teachers?
In order to answer the research questions, 192 teachers from national and public elementary schools in Seoul were surveyed and the zone of acceptance and participation level of each decision-making content was measured and compared. The zone of acceptance of school decision-making was analyzed based on teachers' degree of relevance and expertise of each content. The participation level was analyzed based on the opportunity to participate in school decision-making, expression of ideas or opinions, and degree of influence at decision-making. The main analysis results are as follows:
First, in the overall response, the degree of expertise of teachers in school decision-making varies. However, the degree of relevant was high in most decision-making contents. In addition, most school decision-making contents are located at out or marginal(high relevance) of the zone of acceptance that it is necessary to expand teachers' participation. Meanwhile, the degree of relevant and expertise depending on the experience as a head teachers or career were different. The relevance and expertise of teachers who had experience as a head teacher or high career was high in almost all decision-making contents, and most school decision-making contents were found to be located out of the zone of acceptance. On the other hand, the relevance and expertise of teachers who without experience as a head teacher or less career experience were varied. And the zone of acceptance was also varied out, in or marginal(high relevance)of the zone of acceptance.
Second, the degree of opportunity, expression, and influence of elementary school teachers in school decision-making has decreased in the order of opportunity, expression, influence. And these tendency made four types of participation level: the type which not even given opportunities to participate, the type which only given opportunities to participate, the type which the degree of opportunity and expression high, the type which all degree was met. Meanwhile, teachers had experience as a head teacher or high career showed the highest participation level in almost all school decision-making contents. On the other hand, participation level of teachers without experience as a head teacher or less career experience were varied.
Third, by comparing the zone of acceptance and participation level in school decision-making, it was confirmed that teacher participation was being made in accordance with the zone of acceptance in some decision-making contents. On the other hand, it was confirmed that the other decision-making contents were located out or marginal(high relevance) of the zone of acceptance, but the participation level was not made according to the zone of acceptance.
Through the analysis results, this study led to the following conclusions:
First, Policy support is needed to activate all teachers' expression and influence go beyond decision-making participation which was centered on providing opportunities for participation. From the analysis results, participation level in school decision-making appeared in four types: ‘Arbitrary decision-making’ in which even opportunities to participate are not given to most teachers, ‘Formal participatory decision-making’ in which participation opportunities are only given, but most teachers are not(or unable to) express their opinions, ‘Suggesting participatory decision-making’ in which opinions or ideas was expressed by teachers, but have not influence on final decision-making, ‘Fully participatory decision-making’ in which all of degree was met. These results mean that in order to activate all teachers' participation in school decision-making, directions to increasing the degree of teachers' expression and influence also need to be explored with opportunity for participation.
Second, by subdividing the size or scope of school decision-making contents into the small groups, teachers' access to school decision-making should be improved. In the results of the zone of acceptance, teachers' perceptions of school decision-making were more focused on the small groups like same grade year rather than every school level. This means that teachers can feel a sense of distance from decision-making contents made for every school level. In that sense, in order to induce teachers' participation, the size or scope of decision-making is necessary to subdivide into the small groups so that it can be recognized more closely from the point of view of the teachers.
Third, school needs to establish institutional arrangements or change the school organizational culture to allow school decision-making to be delegated to small groups, in other words on a team level. In the results of participation level, almost all school decision-making had been delegated to teachers who had experience as a head teacher or high career. This means that even if decision-making contents are subdivided according to the small groups, its powers or responsibilities can be delegated to a specific few and other arbitrary decision-making can be caused. In other words, in order to have effective teachers' participation, the school decision-making must be delegated to small groups, in other words on a team level like the same grade year or same subject rather than a specific few teachers.