اعتباریابی مدل مدارس یادگیرنده ویاددهنده درآموزش و پرورش

دوماهنامه علمی - پژوهشی رهیافتی نو در مدیریت آموزشی

دوره 12، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 50، مهر و آبان 1400، صفحه 53-72   

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30495/jedu.2021.24967.4979

نویسندگان

تهمینه شهسواری¹؛ محبوبه سلیمانپور عمران^{* 2}؛ مریم حافظیان³

¹دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، واحد بجنورد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بجنورد، ایران.

²استادیار، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، واحد بجنورد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بجنورد، ایران

³استادیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی،واحد بجنورد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بجنورد، ایران

تاریخ دریافت: 31 اردیبهشت 1399،  تاریخ بازنگری: 30 مرداد 1399،  تاریخ پذیرش: 23 آبان 1400 

چکیده

چکیده
مقدمه و هدف: در هزاره سوم تنها سازمانهایی دوام می آورند که بتوانند یاددهی و یادگیری را در کلیه فعالیت‌های خود متمرکز کرده و به سازمان یاد‌دهنده و یادگیرنده تبدیل شوند.هدف از انجام این پژوهش، اعتباریابی مدل مدارس یادگیرنده و یاددهنده در آموزش و پرورش بود.
روش شناسی: روش پژوهش از نوع آمیخته بود. در بخش کیفی، 12 نفر از اعضاء هیأت علمی و خبرگان آشنا به تعلیم و تربیت با روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند و در بخش کمّی از مجموع 460 نفر از مدیران و کارشناسان آموزش و پرورش استان خراسان شمالی، براساس فرمول کوکران 210 نفر به عنوان نمونه تحقیق با روش تصادفی ساده انتخاب شدند. اطلاعات در بخش کیفی به روش داده بنیاد و با استفاده از مصاحبه نیمه ساختاریافته و در بخش کمّی به روش میدانی و با ابزار پرسشنامه محقق ساخته جمع‌آوری گردید. که روایی آن با نظر متخصصان و پایایی آن به وسیله آلفای کرونباخ 98/0 تعیین شد. برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌های کیفی از فرآیند کدگذاری راهبرد نظریه داده بنیاد و برای داده‌های کمی از روش‌های آمار توصیفی و استنباطی و تحلیل عامل اکتشافی و تأییدی با استفاده از نرم‌افزار 21SPSS و 20 AMOS استفاده شد.
یافته ها: یافته‌های پژوهش منجر به شناسایی و تأیید 9 مقوله اصلی منابع انسانی، توانمندسازی، محیط یادگیری، ساختار، فرهنگی، سیاست‌گذاری، فناوری اطلاعات، پشتیبانی، اجتماع ‌یادگیرنده و 25 مؤلفه فرعی در مدارس یادگیرنده و نیز 9 مقوله اصلی رهبری، زیرساخت، برنامه‌ریزی درسی، مدیریت دانش، نگرش و ارزش‌ها، بهداشتی روانی، مشارکت، نوآوری و اهداف و مأموریت و 36 مؤلفه فرعی تأثیرگذار در مدارس یاددهنده گردید و هم‌چنین نتایج نشان داد که الگوی استخراج شده، از اعتبار درونی بالایی برخوردار می‌باشد.
نتیجه گیری: ارائه مدل کاربردی مناسب برای مدارس ضروری است تا ضمن توجه به تمامی عوامل مؤثر در یاد دهندگی و یادگیرندگی ، بتوانند به مدرسه یادگیرنده ،یاددهنده تبدیل شوند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

مدارس یاد‌دهنده؛ مدارس یادگیرنده؛ مدل؛ آموزش و پرورش

عنوان مقاله [English]

Validation the model of learning and teaching schools in education.

نویسندگان [English]

tahmineh shahsavari¹؛ mahboubeh soleimanpouromran²؛ maryam hafezian³

¹Ph. D. Student, Department of Education Management, Bojnourd branch, Islamic Azad University, Bojnourd, Iran.

²Assistant professor Department of Education Management, Bojnourd branch, Islamic Azad University, Bojnourd, Iran

³Assistant professor Department of Education Management, Bojnourd branch, Islamic Azad University, Bojnourd, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Abstract
Introduction and Aim: In the third millennium, only those organizations abide that can centralize teaching and learning in all their activities, so that they can convert to a teaching and learning organization. The purpose this research was to Validation the model of learning and teaching schools in education.  
Methods: The used method was mixed method. Regarding the qualitative section, faculty members and experts who were familiar with training and education were selected through purposeful sampling method and regarding the quantitative section, based on Cochran formula, from among 460 individuals of managers and experts in the education of North Khorasan Province, 210 individuals were selected as the samples of the study using simple random sampling method. Data of the qualitative section were collected through grounded theory using semi-structured interview and regarding the quantitative section, the data were collected using field method and researcher-made questionnaire was used as the instrument of the study. the validity and reliability of which was determined by professional assessment and by Cronbach’s alpha (0.98), respectively To analyze the qualitative data, the codification process of the grounded theory strategy was used and for analyzing the quantitative data, descriptive and inferential statistical methods as well as exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were utilized though SPSS, version 21, software and AMOS, version 20, software.
Results: The findings of the study led to the identification of 9 main categories including human resources, empowerment, learning environment, structure, culture, policy, information technology, support and learner society as well as 25 secondary categories in the learning schools and 9 main categories of leadership, sub-structure, lesson programming, knowledge management, attitudes and values, mental health, cooperation, innovation, aims and mission and 36 secondary influential components in the teaching schools; The results also showed that the extracted model has a high internal validity. Conclusion: presenting an appropriate applied model, which can be influential in learning and teaching schools, so that they can convert to a learning and teaching schools.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

teaching schools, learning schools, model, education

مراجع

1. Allen, D. Brown, A. Karanasios, S. & Norman, A. (2013). How should technology– mediated organizational change be explained? A comparison of the contributions of critical realism and activity theory. Mis Quarterly, 37(3): 835 –854.
2. Antunes, HD. J. G. & Pinheiro, P.G.(2020). Linking knowledge management, organizational learning and memory. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge ,5(2):140-149

 

1. Bae, S. Song, J. & Kim, H. (2012). Teachers’ Creativity in Career Technical Education: The Mediating Effect of Knowledge Creation Practices in the Learning Organization,The Korean Social Science Journal, 39 (1), 59-81.
2. Bagheri Kerachi, A. Abbaspour, A.  Aghazade, A. Rahimian, H. & Mehregan, M. R. (2014). Applicatiion Level of Organizational Agility Indices at Universities. Bimonthly of Education Strategies in Medical Sciences, 7( 1): 25- 31, (in Persian).
3. Benoliel, P.  (2017).  Promoting the school learning processes: principals as learning boundary spanners, Masters,The School of Education, Faculty of Social Sciences, Bar-Ilan University.

 

1. Chooppawa, R. Sirisuthi, C. Ampai, A. & Sripathar, S. (2012). The Development of Learning Organization Model for Private Vocational School, European Journal of Social Sciences, 30 (4), 586-596.
2. Daneshfard, K. & Zakeri M. (2015). Knowledge Management (Principles, Processes and Functions). Tehran: Saffar Publication. [In Persian].
3. Dehghan Manshadi, M. Saeidian Khorasgani, N. & Nazari,R. (2018). Presenting a Teaching Organization Model for Farhangian University, Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration,9(4): 249-262, (in Persian).
4. De Pietro, O. De Rose, M. & Valenti, A. (2017). Methodologies and Technologies to Support Didactics for Competencies. Realization of an Active and Participatory Teaching Activity in a University Context. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13( 1): 127-133.
5. Eftekharjou, S. (2016). measuring the possibility of using learning organization criteria in elementary female schools of Tehran city, M.A. thesis of educational administration, Islamic Azad University of central Tehran. (in Persian).
6. Ehsani, GH. H. & Seied-Abbaszadeh, M. M. (2012). Relationship factors of learning organization with teachers creativity and innovation in highschools and preuniversity centers. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 3 (4), 1-20. (In Persian).
7. Ekman, A. (2004). Learning organization in theory and practice. UMI Parquets Digital Dissertation full citation & Abstract. ISBN:554-5911-0.
8. Eskandari, A. (2013). A study of the characteristics of the learning organization and transformational leadership style and their relationship with the organizational effectiveness of primary schools of the Board of Trustees and ordinary people of Hamadan province, M.A. thesis of educational administration, Bu Ali Sina University of Hamadan , Faculty of Literature and Humanities, (In Persian).
9. Fadaie, N. Khorshidi, A. Fathi vaejarghah, K. & Abbasi Sarak, L. (2019). Presenting the pattern of learning organization in educative elementary schools of Tehran, Research in educational systems,12,147-162. (In Persian).
10. Garvin, D. A. (2000). Learning in action. A guide to putting the learning organization to work, Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Press.
11. Ghanbari, S. & Eskandari, A. (2014). The relationship between leadership styles and learning organization in primary schools, Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration,5(4), 65-94(In Persian).
12. Gilbert, N. Petra, A. & Andreas, P. (2007). Learning ininnovation networks: Some simulation experiments. Physical A, 378: 100-109.
13. Gregory, N. (2007). Characteristics of the Learning Organization and Organizational Performance Indicators in Operational, Financial, and Knowledge Dimensions in Large Companies with State Ownership, Doctorate dissertation, university of America.
14. Hasani, M. (2006). A model for spreading innovation in the Iran education system. Educational innovations Quarterly, 5, 52-58(In Persian).
15. Hatamian, J. (2019).  Designing and testing antecedents and implications of a professional learning society: a mixed research in the elementary level schools of Tehran province, Ph.D. thesis of educational administration, Kharazmi University, (In Persian).
16. Holba, A.M. Bahr, P.T. Birx, D.L. & Fischler,M.J. (2019). Integral Learning and Working: Becoming a Learning Organization. New Directions for Higher Education,185: 85-99
17. Hoskins, B. &Fredriksson, U. (2013). Learning To Learn: What Is It And Can - It Be Measured, Joint Research Centre Technical Report JRC.
18. Kerfoot, k.(2003).Learning organizations need teachers: The teacher'schallenge. Nursing Economics,21(3) :148-162.
19. Khalilm,M. (2008). Relationship between the culture of learning organization,  job satisfaction and organizational commitment in banking affairs, Doctorate dissertation, university of America.
20. Leithwood, K. Leonard, L.& Sharratt, L. (1998). Conditions Fostering Organizational learning in Schools. Educ. Adm. Q, 34( 2): 243-276.
21. Marks, H.M. & Louis, S.K. (1999). Teacher empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning, Educational Administration Quarterly, 35( 5): 707-750.
22. Moloi, K. C. (2010). How can schools build learning organizations in difficult education contexts? South African Journal of Education, 30: 621-633.
23. Patricia,J. (2008). Knowledge management for a learning organization, Doctorate dissertation, university of America.
24. Pilat, M. (2016). How Organizational Culture Influences Building a Learning Organization. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 4( 1): 83- 92.

 

1. Qadamghahi, S. m. & Ahanchian, M. R. (2005). investigating the status of Mashahd schools based on learning organization characteristics (the view of Senge),  Educational innovations, 4 (4): 132-148 , (In Persian).
2. RastehMoghaddam, A. (2007). Studying the features of learning organization in a learning organization, Management knowledge journal, 69-82 (In Persian).
3. Rastehmoghaddam, A. & Abbaspour, A. (2011). Designing an integrated conceptual model of the learning organization., Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 2(4), 8, 21-54(In Persian).
4. Raintry, J. (2008). Organizational learning in public administration, Doctorate dissertation, universityof America.
5. Rowley, J. & Gibbs, P. (2008). From learning organization to practically wise organization. The Learning Organization. 15(5):356-372.
6. Saadat, V. (2017). Organizational learning as the main role of organizational success, M.A. thesis of educational administration, Emam Hossein University of Tehran, (In Persian).
7. Santos, L. Pinto,J .(2011). Is assessment for learning possible in early school years? Social and behavioral sciences, 12: 283-289.

 

1. Schechter, ch. (2013). From illusion to reality: schools as learning organizations, Doctorate dissertation, School of Education, Bar‐Ilan University.
2. Seied Abbaszadeh, M.M. (2008). Managing Oneself. Urmia: jahad danshgahi Publishing, West Azarbaijan Unit. (In Persian).
3. Senge, P. M. (1990). The leaders new work: building learning organizations, Sloan Management Review.
4. Silins, H.  Mulford, B. Zarins, S. & Bishop, P. (2004).  Leadership and organizational learning in Australian secondary schools, in Mulford, W., Silins, H. and Leithwood, K. (Eds),Educational Leadership for Organizational Learning and Improved Student Outcomes, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 217-242.
5. Strauss,A. & Corbin,J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publ.
6. Tavakoli, A. Saleh Darjani,S. Faraji,V., &  Fallah,A.  (2017). Transforming the School into a Learning Organization,  Fourth International Conference on Psychology of Educational Sciences and Social Studies. Georgia , Tbilisi, International Academy of Sciences. (In Persian).
7. Teresa, D. (2007).  An assessment of the relationship between the learning organization and the transfer of educational outcomes in the organization,Doctorate dissertation, university of America.
8. Thomas, M. Madden, M. & Qazi, W. (2016). Learning Organization Orientation in Gender-Based Categories of Schools. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 10( 1): 51-68.
9. Tichy, N. M. & Cardwell, N. (2002). The cycle of leadership,  Harper Collins Publisher, Newyork,Inc, 464p.
10. Tichy, N. M. & Cohen,E. (1998). The teaching organization.Training and Development. 52(7),66.-82
11.    Weldy, T. G. &  Gillis, W. E. (2010). The learning organization: Variations at different organizational levels,The Learning Organization, 17 (5), 455-470.