國小校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力關係之研究

張昭仁(Jau - Ren Chang)

指導教授 ： 吳清基

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育學系/碩士(2000年)

摘要

國小校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力關係之研究
本研究藉由文獻分析、問卷調查法，探討國小校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力之間的關係。根據對1015位國小教師之量表調查結果，獲得之主要結論如下：
壹、 國小校長轉型領導方面
一、 國小教師知覺國小校長轉型領導行為，平均得分為3.94，以「激勵鼓舞」最常用，其次依序為「型塑願景」、「智能啟發」、「個別關懷」、「魅力影響」。
二、 教師背景變項在轉型領導上部分：教師之性別、任教職務對於校長轉型領導上存有顯著差異；教師年齡、服務年資、學歷背景在校長轉型領導上則無顯著差異。
三、 學校背景變項在校長轉型領導部分：學校所在地區在校長轉型領導上存有顯著差異；學校規模、不同試辦「九年一貫課程」學校在校長轉型領導上則無顯著差異。
貳、 國小校長互易領導方面
一、 國小教師知覺國小校長互易領導行為，平均得分為3.26，以「主動例外管理」最常用，其次依序為「實質後效酬賞」、「承諾後效管理」、「被動例外管理」。
二、 教師背景變項在校長互易領導上部分：教師之性別、任教職務對於校長互易領導上有顯著差異；教師年齡、服務年資、學歷背景在校長互易領導上無顯著差異。
三、 學校背景變項在校長互易領導上部分：學校規模、學校所在地區、學校試辦「九年一貫課程」在校長互易領導上均存有顯著差異。
參、 學校組織學習能力現況方面
一、 國小教師知覺學校組織學習能力，平均得分為3.65得分，最高為「回饋與績效」，其次依序為「教師專業知識與技能」、「教師分享承諾」、「教師共同合作」、「學校領導支持」、「學校結構」。
二、 教師背景變項在學校組織學習能力部分：教師之性別、年齡、服務年資、任教職務、學歷背景對於組織學習能力存有顯著差異。
三、 學校背景變項在學校組織學習能力部分：學校規模、學校所在地區、學校試辦「九年一貫課程」均存有顯著差異。
肆、 國小校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力三者之關係方面
一、 校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力彼此之間存有正相關。
（一） 校長轉型領導總量及各向度與學校組織學習能力總量表及各向度之間呈顯著正相關（r=.58）。
（二） 校長互易領導總量表與學校組織學習能力總量表之間呈正相關（r=.52），惟互易領導的「被動例外管理」與整體組織學習能力及各向度為負相關。
（三） 轉型領導與互易領導之間呈正相關（r＝.60）。
二、 校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力之間有典型相關。
（一） 轉型領導與學校組織學習能力之間有二組典型因素達到顯著水準，透過二組典型相關因素，轉型領導可以有效解釋學校組織學習能力其解釋量佔總變異量的25.87﹪，二組典型因素可以直接解釋學校組織學習能力的51﹪。
（二） 互易領導與學校組織學習能力之間有三組典型因素達到顯著水準，透過三組典型因素，互易領導可以解釋學校組織學習能力總變異量的25.01﹪，而此三組典型因素可以直接解釋學校組織學習能力的46﹪。
三、 國小校長轉型領導與互易領導對於學校組織學習能力的影響有顯著差異。
（一） 低中高三組不同程度國小校長轉型領導，在整體學校組織學習能力及其各向度上，均達顯著差異；教師知覺校長高轉型領導，其整體及各向度之學校組織學習能力亦較高。
（二） 低中高三組不同程度國小校長互易領導，在整體學校組織學習能力及其各向度上，均達顯著差異；教師知覺校長高互易領導其整體及各向度之學校組織學習能力亦較高。
（三） 互易領導之高「被動例外管理」，對於整體學校組織學習能力及其各向度上之影響，有降低學校組織學習能力情形。
四、 校長轉型領導、互易領導，在學校組織學習能力上並無顯著的交互作用存在。
五、 轉型領導、互易領導各向度，對整體學校組織學習能力有預測力，其能解釋變異量可達39﹪。
最後，根據上述結論，本研究並針對教育行政主管機關、國小校長、國小教師及未來之研究者提出建議。

關鍵字

轉型領導 ； 互易領導 ； 學校組織學習能力

並列摘要

A Study of the Relationships among Principals’ Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership and the Capacity for Organizational Learning in Elementary Schools.
Jau – Ren Chang
Abstract
Via the analyses of literature reviews and questionnaires, this study aims at investigating the relationship among the three variables – elementary school principals’ transformational leadership, transactional leadership and the capacity for organizational learning. Based on the results of investigating 1015 elementary school teachers, the major findings are as follows:
A. On principal transformational leadership
a. From elementary school teachers’ perception of their principals’ transformational leadership, the average score is 3.94. The most frequently used dimension is “inspirational motivation”, next in order “shaped vision”, “intellectual stimulation”, “individual consideration”, ”charisma influence”.
b. Teachers' background variables on principals’ transformational leadership. Sex and position of service both result in significant differences, while age, years of service, educational backgrounds show no significant difference.
c. Schools' background variables on principals’ transformational leadership. The locations of schools show significant differences, while the scales of schools, different implementation of the New 1-9 Curriculum show no significant difference.
B. On principal transactional leadership
a. From elementary school teachers’ perception of their principals’ transactional leadership, the average grade is 3.26. The most frequently used dimension is “active management by exception”; next in order “reward”, “promises”, “passive management by exception”.
b. Teachers' background variables on principals’ transactional leadership. The two variables sex and position of service show significant differences, while age, years of service, educational backgrounds show no significant difference.
c. Schools' background variables on principals’ transactional leadership. The scales of schools, the locations of schools, implementation of the New 1-9 Curriculum schools all show significant differences.
C. On the capacity for organizational learning.
a. From elementary school teachers’ perception the capacity for organizational learning, the average grade is 3.65, the most dimension of their perception is “feedback and accountability”, next in order ” teachers’ professional knowledge and skills”, “teachers’ share commitment”, “teachers’ collaboration”,” supportive leadership”, “structure change”.
b. Teachers' background variables on the capacity for organizational learning. Sex, age, years of service, educational backgrounds show significant differences.
c. Schools' background variables on the capacity for organizational learning. The scales of schools, the locations of schools and implementation of the New 1-9 Curriculum schools all show significant differences.
D. On the relationship of principals’ transformational leadership, transactional leadership and the capacity for organizational learning.
a. Significant positive correlation exists between the principals’ transformational leadership, transactional leadership and the capacity for organizational learning.
I. The correlation coefficient between principals’ transformational leadership and transactional leadership is .58.
II. The correlation coefficient between principals’ transactional leadership and the capacity for organizational learning is .52, but it shows negative correlation between passive management by exception and the capacity for organizational learning.
III. The correlation coefficient between the principals’ transformational leadership, transactional leadership is .60.
b. The canonical correlation exists among the principals’ transformational leadership, transactional leadership and the capacity for organizational learning.
I. Two groups’ canonical factors have reached the level of significance between the principals’ transformational leadership and the capacity for organizational learning. Through two groups’ canonical factors, principals’ transformational leadership can explain the capacity for organizational learning , 25.87﹪of the total variance; two groups’ canonical factors can directly explain the capacity for organizational learning, 51﹪of the total variance.
II. Three groups’ canonical factors have reached the level of significance between the principals’ transactional leadership and the capacity for organizational learning. Through three groups’ canonical factors, principals’ transactional leadership can explain the capacity for organizational learning, 25.01﹪of the total variance. Moreover, three groups’ canonical factors can directly explain the capacity for organizational learning, 46﹪of the total variance.
c. Transformational leadership and transactional leadership show significant differences on the schools’ capacity for organizational learning.
I. Low, middle, high degrees of the principals’ transformational leadership groups show significant differences on the capacity for organizational learning.
II. Low, middle, high degrees of the principals’ transactional leadership groups show significant differences on the capacity for organizational learning.
III. High degree of passive management by exception has degraded the capacity for organizational learning.
d. There is no significance interactive effects between principals’ transformational leadership and transactional leadership on the capacity for organizational learning.
e. The transformational leadership and transactional leadership have significant prediction on the capacity for organizational learning. Two variables could explain 39% of the total variance.
Based on the above-mentioned conclusions, this study also offers suggestions to educational administration units, school principals, teachers and researchers for further studies.
Keywords: transformational leadership, transactional leadership, the capacity for organizational learning.

並列關鍵字

transformational leadership ； transactional leadership ； the capacity for organizational learning

參考文獻

葉子超（民88）。轉型領導在國民中小學教育之運用。國立編譯館通訊，12（2），21-27。

Leithwood, K. (1992). The move toward transformational leadership. Educational Leadership, 49(5), 8-12.

葉子超（民89）。道德領導在國民中小學教育之應用，載於學校行政雙月刊，第五期，頁23-29。台北：中華民國學校行政研究學會。

廖裕月（民87）。國小校長轉化領導型式與領導效能之研究：以北部四縣市為例。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。

潘慧玲（民88）。學校效能研究領域的發展，載於教育研究集刊43輯，頁77-102。台北：師大書苑。