An Empirical Analysis on the Relationship between Leadership Styles and Motivation in School Organization|RISS 상세보기

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study has investigated teacher"s motivation within schools with having different leadership style, and how leadership styles affect their motivation. For the analysis, a total of 300 surveys were sent and 175 were returned which is a response rate of approximately 58.3%, and the multiple-regression approach was used. According to the results, just two of four transactional attributes analyzed appeared as a significant predictor of stimulating teachers" effort. Of four variables with regard to transactional leadership, the standardized coefficients of Directive and Control oriented appear definitely not to have an influence on teachers" motivation, presenting Directive oriented(B = -.021, p <.057) and Control oriented(B = -.013, p <.051). While Merit pay system(B = .173, p <.002) and Appraisal(B = .127, p <.034) have a little influential effects on the teachers" motivation, explaining the standardized coefficients of Merit pay system(Beta = .161, p <.002) and that of Appraisal(Beta = .129, p <.034). Even though these factors are a little affecting teacher"s motivation, the effectiveness has not been as much as our expectations. Compared to variables concerning transformational leadership, the explanatory influence of those variables is low. In sum, this study might contribute to seeking of new method for teacher"s motivation by empirically proving that transformational leadership is much more effective than transactional leadership. In addition, the study might render useful services to the more elaborate and clear perception about the relationship between school leadership and teacher"s motivation due to suggesting principles for developing a new integrated model of teacher motivation, encouraging researchers to analyze the variables which are not explained here for more valuable study.

번역하기

목차 (Table of Contents)

Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. Theoretical Debate and Setting Variables
Ⅲ. Research Design and Methodology
Ⅳ. Results and Discussion
Ⅴ. Conclusions

Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. Theoretical Debate and Setting Variables
Ⅲ. Research Design and Methodology
Ⅳ. Results and Discussion
Ⅴ. Conclusions
References

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Rosenholtz, S. J., "Workplace conditions that affect teacher quality and commitment: Implications for teacher induction programs" 89 : 421-439, 1989

2 Mitchell, D. E., "Work Orientation and Job Performance: Toward a Cultural Theory of Work Motivation" State University of New York Press 1987

3 Colley, A. C., "What can principals do about new teacher attrition?" 81 : 22-24, 2002

4 Stone, A. G., "Transformational versus servant leadership – a difference in leader focus" Servant Leadership Roundtable 2003

5 Cox, P. L., "Transformational leadership: a success story at Cornell University" 2001

6 Barnett, K., "Transformational leadership in schools – panacea, placebo or problem?" 39 (39): 24-46, 2001

7 Avolio, B. J., "Transformational Leadership, Charisma and Beyond" School of Management, SUNY at Binghamton Working Paper 1985

8 Spreitzer, G. M., "Traditionality matters: an examination of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in the United States and Taiwan" 26 : 205-227, 2005

9 Feinberg, B. J., "The role of within-group agreement in understanding transformational leadership" 78 : 471-488, 2005

10 Bryant, S. E., "The role of transformational and transactional leadership in creating, sharing and exploiting organizational knowledge" 9 (9): 32-44, 2003