A study of the "Situational Leadership Theory" applied in Taiwan''s elementary school

• Main Authors: Hsu Tien-Ruei, 許天瑞
• Other Authors: Chen Ching-Ruey
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2002
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/06316253501980098033

碩士 === 國立屏東師範學院 === 國民教育研究所 === 90 === ABSTRACT The present study is trying to investigate “Situational Leadership Theory” advocated by Hersey & Blanchard. In this model, we apply the structure and content of the theory to examine the appliance of “Situational Leadership Theory” to elementary schools. We analyzed the styles of leadership of elementary school principles, readiness of teachers, and school effectiveness in general. This study adopted questionnaire survey and literature analysis. According to the goal and questions of the study, we adopted “Leadership Effectiveness Adoption Descriptive Questionnaire”(LEAD-other) by Hersey & Blanchard and the proposed “scale of readiness of teachers” and “school readiness questionnaire”. The mother group of the study was public school teachers in Pingtung County. The survey samples include a total number of 554 teachers randomly selected from 57 different sizes of schools. The total number of usable sets of instrument returned was 456. The collected data was analyzed by the statistic methods of “Chi-square test”, “t-test”, “one-way ANOVA”, and “two-way MANOVA.” The conclusions are as followed: 1. The main leadership style is “selling style”(S2) and the second one is “telling style”(S1). The fewest using by principles is “delegating style” (S4). 2. Principles’ leadership styles are different based on sex of teachers, education background, area and sizes of schools. 3. Differences exist among teachers’ sex and education background regarding to teachers’ readiness. Teachers’ readiness mainly fitted to low readiness (R1) and high readiness (R4), which show extremely difference. And teachers’ readiness of R2 and R4 reveal the higher school effectiveness. 4. School effectiveness is different by area and size of schools. It has no relations with teachers’ variable. 5. Promotional styles of “selling”(S2) and “participating”(S3) and “delegating style” (S4) leadership can produce the higher school effectiveness excluding situational factors. 6. The correlation within principles’ leadership and teachers’ readiness is positive. 7. Principles’ leadership shows interaction with teachers’ readiness on school readiness. 8. Matched group had better effectiveness than non-matched group. The result of analysis supports the “Situational Leadership Theory”. It also shows that principles’ leadership should be adjusted by teachers’ readiness. In the meanwhile, teachers’ readiness has its own important position when we need to predict the relation between leadership attitude and school effectiveness. Further suggestions and possible application of the model are also discussed in the main context.