初中校长多元领导对教师合作的影响*——基于集体效能感的中介作用分析

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

基于多元领导理论、教师合作理论和文化自我表征理论,本研究探讨了初中校长多元领导对教师合作的影响及集体效能感的中介作用。采用问卷调查法,共获得1 110份有效的样本数据,并运用层级回归分析方法得出以下结论:初中校长多元领导对教师合作有正向影响,与教师集体效能感也显著相关;同时教师集体效能感在初中校长多元领导对教师合作产生影响的过程中发挥部分中介作用。据此,本研究认为在教育实践中应重点关注校长领导与管理方式的优化,进而促进教师合作的有效生发与持续改进。

关键词: 多元领导, 教师合作, 集体效能感

Abstract:

Based on multi-frame leadership theory,teacher collaboration theory and culture self-representation theory,this paper explores the influence of principal's multi-frame leadership on teacher collabora-tion and the mediating role of collective teacher efficacy. Using the method of questionnaire survey,a total of 1 110 valid sample data were obtained,and the hierarchical regression analysis method was used to draw the following conclusions that principals' multi-frame leadership has a positive impact on teacher collabora-tion,and is significantly related to collective teachers efficacy. At the same time,collective teacher efficacy plays a partial mediating role in the process of the influence of multi-frame leadership on teacher collaboration. Accordingly, this study believes that we should focus on the optimization of the principal's leadership and management style in the educational practice, so as to promote the effective growth and continuous improvement of teacher collaboration.

Key words: multi-frame leadership, teacher collaboration, collective teacher efficacy

中图分类号:

G637

曾佑来. 初中校长多元领导对教师合作的影响^*——基于集体效能感的中介作用分析[J]. 教育科学, 2022, 38(4): 36-43.

Zeng Youlai. Study on the Influence of Principal's Multi-Frame Leadership on Teacher Collaboration in Junior Middle Schools: Analysis of the Mediating Effect Based on Collective Efficacy[J]. Education Science, 2022, 38(4): 36-43.

图/表 5

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 65

[1]	中共中央国务院. 中共中央国务院关于全面深化新时代教师队伍建设改革的意见[EB/OL].(2018-01-31)[2022-06-06]. http//www.gov.cn/zhengce/2018-01/31/content_5262659.htm.
[2]	BANERJEE N, STEARNS E, MOLLER S, et al. Teacher job satisfaction and student achievement:the roles of teacher professional community and teacher collaboration in schools[J]. American journal of education, 2017, 123(2):203-241. doi: 10.1086/689932
[3]	刘胜男. 教师专业学习的实证研究[M]. 上海: 上海三联书店, 2018:171-180.
[4]	李新翠. 何以促进中小学教师专业合作:基于近万名中小学教师的经验证据[J]. 教育研究, 2020, 41(7):143-153.
[5]	VANGRIEKEN K, DOCHY F, RAES E, Kyndt E, et al. Teacher collaboration:a systematic review[J]. Educational research review, 2015, 15(1):17-40. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002
[6]	胡春光, 董泽芳. 论学校领导研究的新趋势:多元整合领导的理论架构[J]. 教育研究与实验, 2018(1):35-41.
[7]	[8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] BOLMAN L G, DEAL T E. Reframing organizations:artistry,choice,and leadership[M]. 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008:47、122、137、164、198、209、253、269.
[15]	[43] [55] BOLMAN L G, DEAL T E. Leadership and management effectiveness:a multi-frame,multi-sector analysis[J]. Human resource management, 1991, 30(4):509-534. doi: 10.1002/hrm.3930300406
[16]	BOLMAN L G, DEAL T E. Leading and managing: effects of context, culture, and gender[J]. Educational administration quarterly, 1992, 28(3): 314-329. doi: 10.1177/0013161X92028003005
[17]	SANCAR R, ATAL D, DERYAKULU D. A new framework for teachers' professional development[J]. Teaching and teacher education, 2021(101):1-12.
[18]	饶从满, 张贵新. 教师合作:教师发展的一个重要路径[J]. 教师教育研究, 2007(1):12-16.
[19]	WEST J F. Educational collaboration in restructuring of schools[J]. Journal of educational and psychological consultation, 1990, 1(1):23-40. doi: 10.1207/s1532768xjepc0101_2
[20]	SAWYER L B E, RIMM-KAUFMAN S E. Teacher collaboration in the context of the responsive classroom approach[J]. Teachers and teaching:theory and practice, 2007, 13(3):211-245. doi: 10.1080/13540600701299767
[21]	BAROTT J E, RAYBOULD R. Changing schools into collaborative organizations[C]. In D. G.Pounder (Ed.),Restructuring schools for collaboration:Promises and pitfalls. Albany,NY: State University Press, 1998:27-42.
[22]	GAJDA R, KOLIBA C J. Evaluating and improving the quality of teacher collaboration:a field-tested framework for secondary school leaders[J]. Nassp bulletin, 2008, 92(2):133-153. doi: 10.1177/0192636508320990
[23]	GOODLAD J, MANTLE-BROMLEY C, GOODLAD S J. Education for everyone:agenda for education in a democracy[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004:110.
[24]	[67] EREZ M. Culture,self-identity,and work[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993:22、121.
[25]	LI S L, HE W, YAM K C. When and why empowering leadership increases followers' taking charge:a multilevel examination in China[J]. Asia pacific journal of management, 2015, 32(3):645-670. doi: 10.1007/s10490-015-9424-1
[26]	[48] GODDARD R D, HOY W K, HOY A W. Collective teacher efficacy:its meaning,measure,and impact on student achievement[J]. American educational research journal, 2000, 37(2):479-507. doi: 10.3102/00028312037002479
[27]	[47] MARK F Z. Is working together worth it?Examining the relationship between the quality of teacher collaboration,instruction,and student achievement[D]. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Amherst Doctoral dissertation, 2011:1、163.
[28]	SILVA J S, AMANTE L, MORGADO J. School climate,principal support and collaboration among portuguese teachers[J]. European journal of teacher education, 2017, 40(4):505-520. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2017.1295445
[29]	HALLETT M. The effect of school-leader support and participation in decision making on teacher collaboration in Dutch primary and secondary schools[J]. Educational management administration & leadership, 2014, 42(1):75-98.
[30]	Bénédicte Vanblaere, Devos G. Relating school leadership to perceived professional learning community characteristics:a multilevel analysis[J]. Teaching & teacher education, 2016, 57(5):26-38.
[31]	[62] GUMUS S, BULUT O, BELLIBAS M S. The relationship between principal leadership and teacher collaboration in turkish primary schools:a multilevel analysis[J]. Education research & perspectives, 2013, 40(1):1-29.
[32]	[63] PARK J H, HAM S H. Whose perception of principal instructional leadership? Principal-teacher perceptual (dis)agreement and its influence on teacher collaboration[J]. Asia Pacific journal of education, 2016, 36(3):450-469. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2014.961895
[33]	CHENG Y C. Principal's leadership as a critical factor for school performance:evidence from multi-levels of primary schools[J]. School effectiveness and school improvement, 1994, 5(3):299-317. doi: 10.1080/0924345940050306
[34]	DUSSAULT M, PAYETTE D, LEROUX M. Principals' transformational leadership and teachers' collective efficacy[J]. Psychological reports, 2008, 102(2):401-410. doi: 10.2466/pr0.102.2.401-410
[35]	HONG F Y, HUANG D H, CHENG K T, et al. The relationship between principles' transformational leadership and teacher self-efficacy:The mediating effects of group cohesion and teacher collective-efficacy[J]. Journal of national pingtung university of education, 2013, 40(3):215-242.
[36]	ROSS J A, GRAY P. Transformational leadership and teacher commitment to organizational values:the mediating effects of collective teacher efficacy[J]. School effectiveness and school improvement, 2006, 17(2):179-199. doi: 10.1080/09243450600565795
[37]	[59] KOCAK S, OZDEMIR M. Evaluation of collective teacher efficacy from the perspective of four-frame leadership model[J]. Egitim ve bilim-education and science, 2020, 45(203): 347-365.
[38]	VOELKEL R H, CHRISPEELS J H. Understanding the link between professional learning communities and teacher collective efficacy[J]. School effectiveness & school improvement, 2017, 28(5):1-22.
[39]	BROWNELL M T, YEAGER E, RENNELLS M S, et al. Teachers working together:what teacher educators and researchers should know[J]. Teacher education and special education, 1997, 20(4):340-359. doi: 10.1177/088840649702000405
[40]	SHACHAR H, SHMUELEVITZ H. Implementing cooperative learning,teacher collaboration and teachers'sense of efficacy in heterogeneous junior high schools[J]. Contemporary educational psychology, 1997, 22(1):53-72. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1997.0924
[41]	SWEETLAND S R, HOY W K. School characteristics and educational outcomes:toward an organizational model of student achievement in middle schools[J]. Educational administration quarterly, 2000, 36(5):703-729. doi: 10.1177/00131610021969173
[42]	[56] GODDARD R, GODDARD Y, KIM E S, et al. A theoretical and empirical analysis of the roles of instructional leadership,teacher collaboration,and collective efficacy beliefs in support of student learning[J]. American journal of education, 2015, 121(4):501-530. doi: 10.1086/681925
[44]	SEYAL A H, YUSSOF A, MOHAMMAD A, et al. Exploring CEO's leadership frames and e-commerce adoption among Bruneian SEMs[J]. South East Asian journal of management, 2012, 6(1):33-52.
[45]	TANRIOGEN Z M, BASTURK R, BASER M U, et al. Bolman and Deal's four frame theory:manager's leadership style and organizational culture[J]. Pamukkale university journal of education, 2014(36) :191-202.
[46]	TAN M, ADAMS D. Malaysian student leaders' perception of their leadership styles[J]. International journal of innovation and learning, 2018, 23(3):368-382. doi: 10.1504/IJIL.2018.10010776
[49]	刘红云, 张雷, 孟庆茂. 教师集体效能量表的修订[J]. 应用心理学, 2004, 10(1):28-32.
[50]	龙立荣. 层级回归方法及其在社会科学中的应用[J]. 教育研究与实验, 2004(1):51-56.
[51]	吴明隆. 结构方程模型:Amos实务进阶[M]. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2013:62.
[52]	BARON R M, KENNY D A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research:conceptual,strategic,and statistical considerations[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1986, 51(6):1173-1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
[53]	ROBINSON V, LLOYD C A, ROWE K J. The impact of leadership on student outcomes:an analysis of the differential effects of leadership types[J]. Educational administration quarterly, 2008, 44(5):13-40.
[54]	李德显, 曾佑来. 教师合作对学生学业成就的影响:基于46篇文献的元分析[J]. 外国教育研究, 2020, 47(9):3-17.
[57]	[66] CANSOY R, PARLAR H. Examining the relationship between school principals' instructional leadership behaviors,teacher self-efficacy,and collective teacher efficacy[J]. International journal of educational management, 2018, 32(4):550-567.
[58]	王恒, 宋萑, 王晨霞. 校长教学领导力对教师幸福感的影响:以教师集体效能感和自我效能感为链式中介[J]. 全球教育展望, 2020, 49(6):90-101.
[60]	张平平, 胡咏梅. 中小学校长领导力对教师专业合作行为的影响[J]. 湖南师范大学教育科学学报, 2018, 17(5):15-24.
[61]	张佳, 彭新强. 中国大陆教师专业学习社群的内涵与发展:基于对上海市中小学的调查研究[J]. 教师教育研究, 2014, 26(3):61-68.
[64]	SEHGAL P, NAMBUDIRI R, MISHRA S K. Teacher effectiveness through self-efficacy, collaboration and principal leadership[J]. International journal of educational management, 2017, 31(4):505-517.
[65]	SZCZESIUL S, HUIZENGA J. The burden of leadership:exploring the principal's role in teacher collaboration[J]. Improving schools, 2014, 17(2):176-191. doi: 10.1177/1365480214534545

因子名	特征值	贡献率	累积贡献率	信度系数α
结构领导	5.13	19.68	19.68	0.86
人力资源领导	1.26	19.12	57.93	0.85
象征领导	1.65	19.12	38.81	0.82
政治领导	1.08	18.19	76.13	0.80
合作意愿	1.08	19.85	65.34	0.80
合作对话	1.56	20.39	45.49	0.78
合作行动	4.54	25.09	25.09	0.79
教学能力评估	4.24	38.62	38.62	0.91
教学任务分析	2.95	26.85	65.48	0.80

问卷	χ²	df	χ²/df	IFI	CFI	TLI	NFI	RMSEA	RMR	GFI
教师合作	112.79	41	2.75	0.96	0.96	0.94	0.93	0.08	0.03	0.92
多元领导	127.58	48	2.65	0.95	0.94	0.92	0.92	0.08	0.05	0.92

变量	因子载荷范围	α值	组合信度(CR)
校长多元领导		0.96
结构领导	0.86~0.90	0.91	0.85
人力资源领导	0.85~0.90	0.91	0.91
象征领导	0.78~0.89	0.89	0.88
政治领导	0.81~0.93	0.92	0.92
教师合作		0.87
合作意愿	0.66~0.82	0.80	0.81
合作对话	0.67~0.70	0.74	0.73
合作行动	0.63~0.75	0.81	0.82
教师集体效能感		0.81
教学能力评估	-	0.70	-
教学任务分析	-	0.64

变量维度	平均数M	S.D	合作意愿	合作对话	合作行动	结构领导	人力资源领导	象征领导	政治领导	教学能力评估	教学任务分析
合作意愿	13.96	1.69	1.00
合作对话	12.83	2.04	0.575^**	1.00
合作行动	21.23	3.00	0.526^**	0.555^**	1.00
结构领导	12.16	2.59	0.284^**	0.224^**	0.296^**	1.00
人力资源领导	11.95	2.62	0.288^**	0.241^**	0.303^**	0.794^**	1.00
象征领导	11.70	2.70	0.255^**	0.231^**	0.282^**	0.793^**	0.836^**	1.00
政治领导	11.55	2.69	0.236^**	0.234^**	0.254^**	0.774^**	0.810^**	0.856^**	1.00
教学能力评估	22.98	4.30	0.245^**	0.265^**	0.237^**	0.348^**	0.325^**	0.296^**	0.284^**	1.00
教学任务分析	19.29	3.76	0.209^**	0.200^**	0.189^**	0.353^**	0.291^**	0.267^**	0.289^**	0.725^**	1.00

变量	教师集体效能感			教师合作
变量	模型1	模型2	模型3	模型4	模型5
控制变量
性别	0.14^***	0.109^***	0.02	-0.01	-0.03
学历	-0.05	-0.05	-0.02	-0.02	-0.01
任教学科	0.03	0.04	-0.05	-0.04	-0.04
任教年级	-0.02	-0.02	0.00	0.00	0.01
教龄	0.03	0.07	0.03	0.06	0.04
自变量
校长多元领导		0.35^***		0.34^***	0.28^***
中介变量
教师集体效能感					0.19^***
R²	0.021	0.145	0.005	0.12	0.151
ΔR²	--	0.124	--	0.115	0.031
F	4.83^***	159.30^***	1.09	25.15^***	27.98^***
ΔF	4.83^***	31.15^***	1.09	144.76^***	39.67^***