Editorial Staff - Sunan Ampeldigilib.uinsby.ac.id/27860/1/School Leadership and School...

Copyright of the abstracts belongs to the authors. The contents may not be reproduced without permission of the respective authors.

National Library of Thailand Cataloging in Publication Data

Faculty of Education Khon Kaen University. 12th APEC and 10th ICER Conference Proceedings.--: Faculty of Education Khon Kaen University, 2017.

997.

1. Educational Science -- Conference. 2. Education -- Research -- Conference. I. Title.

ISBN: 978-616-438-066-0

Editorial Staff: Dr. Ariyaporn Kuroda

Assoc. Prof. On-anong Ritruechai Asst. Prof. Dr. Prin Thananchaibutr

Asst. Prof. Dr. Siribhong Biasiri Asst. Prof. Pattamaporn Thananchaibutr

Mr. Jakkrapong Thongpai Mr.Witthawat Patham

ISBN: 978-616-438-066-0 Anna Offset, Khon Kaen, THAILAND

CD-Rom of Conference ProceedingsPublished 600 copies

Published by Faculty of Education Khon Kaen University

Copyright ©2017

The 10thInternational Conference on Educational Research:

9-10 September 2017, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand

5

Table of Contents

Page

Review Committee 3 Rationale and Themes 13 Message from Khon Kaen University 14 Message from Education University of Hong Kong 15 Message from Mindanao State University -Iligan Institute of Technology 16 Message from State University of Surabaya 17 Message from Central University of Technology, Free State 18 Keynote Address:

Gregory Alexander 20 Imelu G. Mordeno 21 Yatim Riyanto 22

Oral Presentation:

Achara Nuntasri The Results of Using Training Package to Develop Counseling Competencies for Peer Counselor of Loei Rajabhat University, Khon Kaen Education Center Students.

24

Agnes Dianita, et al The Improvement of Indonesian Language Learning Outcomes for Hearing Impairment Students in Special School Through Maternal Reflective Method

34

Ali Mustofa School Leadership and School Effectiveness: Teachers and Students in Madrasah at East Java

41

Amarawadee Tappoon Anxiety in Learning English among Thai Undergraduates: Effects on Listening Abilities

48

Amarawadee Tappoon Applying Speaking Strategies to Overcome Communication Difficulties in Thai EFL Leaners

60

Amelia Tia Buan, et al Teaching Mathematics through Active Learning Approach

70

Andhika Dwi Hardana, et al The Influence of Demonstration Learning Method Toward Fine Motor Ability of Autism Children in Kindergarten Mentari School Sidoarjo

75

Andiek Widodo Education and Training Model For the Candidate of Lecturer’s State Islamic Religious College (PTKIN) in East Java Province

87

Angelo Bernaldo Dalaguit Power Supply Problems and Safety

95

Angelo B. Dalaguit, et al Structural Conduciveness of National High Schools in Camotes Island Philippines: Basis for Empowerment

101

digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id

The 10th International Conference on Educational Research:


School Leadership and School Effectiveness; Teachers and Student’s in Madrasah At East Java

Ali Mustofa1 ([email protected])

A. Introduction School effectiveness is very important to improve school for enhancing quality of school. School improvement concerns the raising of students’ achievements and the school’s ability to manage change (Reynolds et al. 2001). One can compare one’s own school and individual performance against a set of benchmarks and criteria from the international literature on school effectiveness and school improvement. In Indonesia, there are many school to be effectiveness, but there are to many school not be effective specially in madrasah school. For example the school effectiveness have characteristic there are Leadership at all levels: strong, purposeful, adoption of more than one style, Management and organisation: clear, simple, flatter structures, Collective self-review: involving all staff and leading to developing new practices, Staff development: systematic and involving collective and individual needs. Teaching and learning: creative debate amongst teachers and curricula and pedagogy, and Parental involvement: parents as partners in education One characteristic is leadership, school leadership has been identified in the last few years in several international reports and as a key function to assuring quality in education. Research on the subject of leadership has increased and has focused on analysis of the leader as a person and on leadership functions and tasks. Furthermore, it has been stressed in studies that school leadership can be the solution to many problems arising in schools (Bolívar et al., 2013). It is a complex concept, which cannot be understood or applied in a single way and which is defined in terms of a demanding set of functions that include financial administration, human resources management and leadership for learning (Pont et. al. 2008). School leadership is basically underpinned by two conceptual features (Spillane et al., 2010). The first concerns the individual’s personality, style and ability; the second links leadership to forms of organization and, to a smaller extent, to individual practices. School leadership has historically been connected with the role and functions of school-management teams (Schleicher, 2012). During the last decade, however, it has been stressed both in reports by international organizations and in academic works that leadership involves a common culture of expectations, in which everyone is accountable for individual contributions to the collective outcome (Leithwood and Louis, 2011). The idea of organizing schools as learning organizations where the practices allow for continuous learning israpidly and steadily considered as the mediator for achieving school improvement (Silins and Mulford, 2002).The school is gradually transformed into a learning organization which needs to refresh the processes involving its current and future needs (Huber, 2004). A great deal of research on factors promoting teacher effectiveness has been conducted by educational scholars. Leadership practices seem to have quite positive effects on teacher’s 1

Student of Doctoral Program of Management of Education of Universitas Negeri Surabaya Indonesia and lecturer of State Islamic University of Sunan Ampel Surabaya Indonesia

41




lifelong professional development in the school context (Flores 2007) because they have the potential to empower teachers towards a commitment to change and enhance their learning in school organization (Bogler, 2001;Fullan, 2002; Day et al, 2001). Leadership, in whichever model it embraces, has as central goal to ensure and maintain the school improvement which has to do with the quality of teaching; the most influential factor of students’ achievement. It is obvious though that the quality and the effectiveness of leadership is understood and evaluated in correspondence with regards to teachers’ motivation and effectiveness (Fullan, 2001). According to recent research, one of the main leadership practices has to do with the teacher’s empowerment which is strongly related to the central goal of the school; students’ learning. The improvement of the employees’ performance is a significantly important aim which the leader tries to achieve through several actions taking into consideration individuals’ beliefs, values, motivations and skills (Leithwood, 2006). Structuring a specific vision and giving directions, they provide teachers with a strong motivation to improve their performance. In particular, setting a shared purpose that clarifies the roles, the objectives and the desired expectations from the teachers’ performance they enhance teachers’ effectiveness in the classroom. Our purpose in this paper is to reach of the main leadership practices that contribute to school teachers’ and student effectiveness.

B. Literature review Clearly one has to be extremely cautious in understanding and approaching the concept of school effectiveness. It is not a unitary concept; rather it is complex, multi-dimensional, and not reducible to single or simple measures. What is clear is that teacher effectiveness plays a very considerable part in school effectiveness. Further, the provision of checklists of characteristics of effective schools is often accompanied in the literature by caveats against simplistic benchmarking; the problem is one of process, of support, of changing individual teachers, not of producing or emulating checklists. Drawing together the several features of effective schools outlined so far, a common core of features emerges, indicating overall characteristics of effective schools. It would be useful, perhaps, for principals and schools to identify where they stand in relation to the factors indicated.

Teachers and teaching High teacher expectations

Effective classroom management Teachers as positive role models

Positive feedback to, and treatment of, students A relevant but orderly and firm classroom atmosphere

Suitable and stimulating physical environment Consistency amongst teachers, e.g. expectations, behaviour, planning Structured teaching sessions; a concentration on teaching and learning

Intellectually challenging teaching and a work-centred environment Monitoring progress and record keeping

Curriculum A well-planned curriculum

42




There is unprecedented international interest in the question of how educational leader s influence a range of student outcomes. In consequence, at least five reviews of empirical research on the direct and indirect effects of leadership on student outcomes have appeared recently (Bell, Bolam, & Cubillo, 2003; Witziers, Bosker, & Krüger, 2003). A major reason for the interest in the links between leadership and student outcomes is the desire of policy makers in many jurisdictions to reduce the persistent disparities in educational achievement between various social and ethnic groups, and their belief that school leaders play a vital role in doing so. The confidence of the public and politicians in the capacity of school leaders to make a considerable difference to student outcomes is supported by qualitative research on the

Clear aims and objectives translated into classroom practice An emphasis on high academic standards

Effectively deployed resources Management

Good working conditions for staff and students Effective leadership by senior and middle managers

The capability to identify and solve problems Capability to manage change and development

Teacher involvement in decision-making Climate of respect between all participants/stakeholders

A positive climate in the school Clear, simple, flat structures

Shared vision and goals Leadership which builds teamwork

A vision of academic success and how to improve Careful use of targets

Use of performance data to guide decisions, targets and tactics Teamwork both within staff groups and stakeholders

Time and resources for reflection and research Non-dominating senior managers

Students Students given responsibility Shared staff-student activities

Positive student/teacher relationships Encouraging students to express their view

Concern for students’ overall well-being; effective pastoral systems Pupil rights, responsibilities and building self-esteem

Pupil involvement in learning and other aspects of the school Positive student attitudes to school

Maximum communication between teachers and students Good behaviour by students

Community Positive relationships with the local community

Parental involvement in the life and work of the school Home-school partnership planning

Links with business, commerce and industry School governance

43




impact of leadership on school effectiveness and improvement. Case studies of “turn around” schools and of interventions into teaching and learning invariably credit school and district leadership with considerable responsibility for school and teaching effectiveness (Edmonds, 1979). The literature on sustainability also sees the quality of school leadership as a key to continued organizational learning and improvement (Datnow, 2005; Hargreaves & Fink, 2006). However, the picture one gains from the qualitative evidence for the impact of leadership is very different from that gained from quantitative analyses of the direct and indirect effects of leadership on students’ academic and social outcomes. In a meta-analysis of 37 multinational studies of the direct effects of leadership on student outcomes, Witziers reports an average effect (reported as a z score) of 0.02, an estimate that is typically interpreted as indicating no or a very weak impact (Witziers et al., 2003). Most subsequent quantitative research has conceptualized the relationship between leadership and student outcomes as indirect, with leaders establishing the conditions (e.g., provision of teacher professional learning opportunities, forms of student grouping) through which teachers make a more direct impact on students. In the only published meta-analysis of such research, Marzano reports an average effect of approximately 0.4 between leadership and student academic outcomes (Marzano et al., 2005). Effective leadership has a key role in motivating teachers towards individual and shared learning, a factor which is considered to be quite important for school effectiveness to be achieved (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). Consequently, it becomes clear that leadership is the mediator which has the authority to develop and empower teachers in the quest of school effectiveness (Huber, 2004). Over the past 25 years there are several different theoretical models concerning the educational leadership. However, two basic models have dominated: the instructional leadership and the transformational leadership (Hallinger, 2003). Each one of these models considers the school principal’s role and its characteristics from a different perspective. The idea of the educational instructional leadership which was introduced during the early 1980s describes a principal who wants to manage, supervise and develop curriculum and instruction in the school context (Bamburg & Andrews, 1990). Instructional leaders usually aim to school improvement having a strong goal orientation (Hallinger, 2003) but at the same time they construct an academic pressure because of indicating high expectations from the teachers (Hallinger & Murphy, 1986). According to Hallinger (2000), an instructional leader specifies the school’s aims, organizes the instructional program in order to achieve these goals and tries to promote learning by constructing the appropriate climate. Several additional practices are also applied by the principal in the school setting. For example, the communication between the leader and the teaching staff seems to be quite important for the specific educational and learning goals to be extensively known and supported by the total school community. Additionally, the principal should manage the instruction procedure on the whole and supervise the student’s progress. An instructional principal tries also to create a positive learning environment by supporting the professional development, sharing his vision and providing strong motivations and inspirations for learning to the teaching staff (Hallinger, 2000). Instructional Leadership has adopted a top-down approach. On the other side, Transformational Leadership seems to have a bottom-up focus. Specifically, it does not come exclusively from the principal; the teaching staff participate too (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000) and teachers’ needs and views are usually taken into consideration For this reason transformational model of leadership is thought to be a kind of shared or distributed leadership which, based on bottom-up participation, aims to striking educational change (Day et al, 2001). Moreover, contrary to the instructional leadership which is established on direct management and supervision of teaching (Leitner, 1994), transformational principals enforce teachers’

44




capacity and engage them in collaboratively learning. This type of head teachers attempts to link the individual goals with the organizational ones and as a consequence creates the climate where the educators have the chance to be self-motivated towards the achievement of school effectiveness, without the principal’s guidance being necessary (Hallinger, 2003).

C. Method The study used sequential explanatory mixed methods research with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Sequential explanatory mixed method have characteristic an initial phase of qualitatif data collection and analaysis followed by a phase quantitative data collection and analysis. Qualitative research uses phenomenological studies to describe early school leadership and school effectiveness in this case relating to teachers and students, whereas quantitative research uses SEM (Structured equational modeling) based on qualitative research results to be identified. Design of this study The design study was adopted from Tashakkori & Teddlie (2003 in Cameron, 2009), with sequential mixed method quantitative and qualitative approach. There are two phase, the fist phase ex post facto, survey and focus grup, and the second phase is formative evaluation design sub type, field study combined process and product evaluation. The data will get from qualitative approach, and to be continue with quantitative analysis and meta inference confirmatory. Subject and methode for data collection This study used subject leader of school, teachers and students throughout East Java specially in madrasah school. Data collection with in-dept interwiew, observation, focus grup discussion for qualitative, and quesioner and surveys for quantitative research. Analysis data Analysis data for quantitative used structure equation model (SEM), while qualitative data used procedure analysis there are example ; transcrip data, coding and member checking. Result the results of this research have been proposed, (1) effective schools are schools that have good programs, are able to carry out planned programs and conduct measurable evaluations. In preparing the school program engages the community actively with the 8 national standards of education and school vision that have been agreed upon (2). In effective school assistance, it has been found that the results of this study are management involving school residents and stakeholders of interest and are actively receiving input and advice from parents and students. (3). Effective school impact can be measured from the productivity of teachers in the work and for students is the whole potential of students can be accommodated and can be developed in sustainability. (4). The principal has an important role because the whole line so that all school structures can run as plans and procedures that have been mutually agreed. The above results are the result of the quantitative as an ingredient in the development of instruments or measuring instruments in quantitative research. This research has not presented a quantitative result using a structural equation model approach.

D. Refrences

Bamburg, J. and Andrews, R. (1990). School goals, principals and achievement, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2(3), 175–191

45




Bell, L., Bolam, R., & Cubillo, L. (2003). A systematic review of the impact of school

headteachers and principals on student outcomes. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.

Bolívar, A., López, J., and Murillo, F.J. (2013). Liderazgo en las instituciones educativas y[Leadership in Educational Institutions]. Una revisión de líneas de investigación. Revista Fuentes, 14, pp.15-60.

Cameron, R 2009, 'A sequential mixed model research design: design, analytical and display issues', International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches , vol. 3, no.2.

Datnow, A. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in changing

district and state contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 121-153.

Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37, 15–24.

Hallinger, P. (2000). A review of two decades of research on the principalship using the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, Washington

Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational Change: reflections on the practice of instructional

and transformational leadership, Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-351 Hallinger, P. and Murphy, J. (1986). The social context of effective schools, American Journal

of Education, 94(3), 328–355 Huber, S., H. (2004). School Leadership and Leadership development: Adjusting theories and

development programs to values and the core purpose of school, Journal of Education Administration, 42(6), 669-684

Leithwood, K. and Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational School Leadership for Large-Scale

Reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17 (2), 201-227

Leithwood, K. and Louis, K.S. (eds.) (2011). Linking Leadership to Student Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Aurora, CO: ASCD and McREL.

Pont, B., Nusche, D. and Moorman, H. (2008). Improving School Leadership. Volume 1: Policy and Practice. Paris: OECD.

Reynolds, D., Hopkins, D., Potter, D., and Chapman, C. (2001) School Improvement for Schools Facing Challenging Circumstances. London: DES.

46

Editorial Staff - Sunan Ampeldigilib.uinsby.ac.id/27860/1/School Leadership and School...

Documents

Transcript of Editorial Staff - Sunan Ampeldigilib.uinsby.ac.id/27860/1/School Leadership and School...