Full Range Leadership Development Model for School ... · PDF fileคำสำคัญ:...

Naresuan University Journal 2004; 12(1) : 63-77 63
*
Full Range Leadership Development Model forSchool Administrators in the Basic Education
Prateep Binchai* and Nipon Kinawong 65000Faculty of Education, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok 65000, Thailand.*Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Binchai)Received 1 October 2003; revised 15 January 2004; accepted 11 March 2004
1) 2) 3) 4) 5) : ,
AbstractThe efficiency and effectiveness of school administration depend on administrators
leadership. The purposes of this study were to propose the full range leadership model for schooladministrators in the basic education using the concept and theories regarding full range leadership.The full range leadership of school administrators in the basic education surveyed by MultifactorLeadership Questionnaire: (MLQ) and setting the Full Range Leadership Development model (FRLD)by focus group discussion. These findings were the appropriated FRLD model for school administra-tors in the basic education was training process on Bertalanffys system model by: 1) evaluating FRLof trainee; 2) building bodies of knowledge that were important for FRLD; 3) building Individual FullRange Leadership Development Plan: IFRLDP; 4) implementing on IFRLDP; 5) assessing theFRLD of Trainee. It can be concluded from this study that FRLD model for school administrators inthe basic education was training process on Bertarlunffys system model.
Keywords: full range leadership, Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire

64 Naresuan University Journal 2004; 12(1)
(leader)
(leadership) (trait approach) (behavioral approach) (situational approach) (transactional approach) (transformational approach)
(Avolio, 1999) 3 (as a person) (as a process) (as some aspects of both)
(Avolio, 1999) (as a system) (full range leadership) (input) (process) (outcome) (people) (timing) (resource) (vital force) (collective force)
(transactionalleadership) (transformational leadership) (Avolio, 1999) (Murry, 2000) (quitproquo)

Naresuan University Journal 2004; 12(1) 65
(self-interests beyond organizational achieve-ment) (performance beyond expectation) (organizational achievement beyond self-interests)
(Bass, 1985)
.. 2542 (schoolbased management)
1. 2.
3.
1 (content analysis)
2 1,068 (stratified random sampling) (Multifactor Leadership Ques-tionnaire: MLQ) t-test

3 1 2 (focus group discussion)
1 (full range leadership) (Burns, 1978) (trans-actional leadership) (transformational leadership) .. 1985 (Bass, 1985) (Bennis and Nanus, 1985; Fairholm, 1991, 1994, 1995; Kouzes and Posner, 1989; Tichy andDevanna, 1990) (Bass and Avolio, 1994)
(non-leadership) (transactional leadership) (transformational leadership) 1
: FRL=Full Range Leadership NL=Non-LeadershipTA=Transactional Leadership TF=Transformational Leadership
1
1 3
1. (non-leadership) 1 (Laissez-Faire: LF)
2. (transactional leadership) 3 2.1 (Management-by-Exception Passive: MP)2.2 (Management-by-Exception Active: MA)2.3 (Contingent Reward: CR)

3. (transformational leadership)3.1 (Individualized Consideration: IC)3.2 (Intellectual Stimulation: IS)3.3 (Inspirational Motivation: IM)3.4 (Idealized Influence Behavior: IB)3.5 (Idealized Influence Attribute: IA)
(Avolio, 1999) 2 3
2
3
(F
requency
)

2 3
1 (frequency) 3 (a little) (a lot) 2 (a lot) (a little)
2 (active) (passive) (a lot) (a little) ( 3) (a little) (a lot) ( 2)
3 (effective and ineffective) (a lot) (a little) (a little) (a lot)
2 1
1
1 (IA) F F P F2 (IB) F F P F3 (IM) P F P P4 (IS) P F P F5 (IC) F F F F6 (CR) F F F F7 (MA) F F F F8 (MP) F F P F9 (LF) F F F F
7 9 4 8 : F = P =

3 ( 1) ( 2) (focusgroup discussion) (training process)
1. (context)1.1 1.2
2. (input) (body of knowledge) 2.1 (paradigm shift)2.2 (leadership theories)2.3 (full range leadership)
3. (process)3.1 3.2
(Individual Full Range Leadership Development Plan: IFRLDP)3.3 IFRLDP 6 (skills)
3.4
(competency) MLQ-Rater Form4. (output)
IFRLDP 5. (feedback)
5.1 4
5.2 4
4

(Context)1. FRL 2. FRL
(Process) 1. 2. IFRLDP 3. IFRLDP 4. FRL
(skill)
(Feedback)1. FRL
2. FRL
(Input)1. Paradigm Shift2. Leadership Theories3. FRL
(Body of Knowledge)
(Output) FRL
(Competency)
4 FRL
1. MLQ-LeaderForm (pre-test)
2. 3. IFRLDP 4. IFRLDP 5.
IFRLDP 6 MLQ-Rater Form(post-test)

4
1 1.1
1.2
1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4
2
3
6 4
3
2

2
1
1.
F
RL
2.
3.
4.
FRL
1.
F
RL
2.
(p
aradig
m shi
ft)3.
(lead
ership
and
manag
ement
)4.
(lead
ership
of kn
owled
ge wo
rkers)
5.
(new
paradi
gm of
leader
ship)
6.
(lea
dersh
ip the
ories)
2
1.
FRL
2.
FRL
3.
FRL
F
RL
4.
FRL
(Indiv
idual
Deve
lopme
nt Pla
n: ID
P)5.
(com
mitm
ent)
1.
2.
3.
FR
L
4.
25.
(IFR
LDP)
3
FR
L
1.
FRL
2.
FRL
1.
2
4
FR
L
1.
FR
L
2.
1.
1.
2.
(Con
tent)

2
()
1
7.
(Full
Rang
e Lead
ership
: FRL
)8.
(
Multif
actor
Leade
rship
Quest
ionnai
re: M
LQ)
1.
2.
1.
(ML
Q-Le
ader)
2.
(
parad
igm sh
ift)3.
1
4.
2
5.
3
6.
4
7. 5
8.
6
9.
7
10.
8
11.
9
12.
1
0
2
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
16
FRL
(
2)2.
17
3.
18
4.
19 IF
RLDP
Form
3
FR
L
1.
1.
(IF
RLDP
)
2
2.
12-1
5
4
FR
L
1.
2.
3.
SD
t
-test
1.
(ML
Q-Ra
ter)
3.
4.

2
()
1
13.
1
1
14
.
1
2 F
RL15
.
13
FRL
16.
1
4 F
RL17
.
1
5
FRL
1.
2.
3.
4.
2
1.
FRL
2.
F
RL3.
4.
FR
L
5.
46.
FRL
2
7.
FR
L
(IFR
LDP)
8.
IFRL
DP
9.
10
.
I
FRLD
P
3
FR
L
1.
IFRL
DP
2.
IFR
LDP
4
FR
L
1.
2.
5.

2
(
)
1
7
4
0
1
21.
2.
31.
2.
TA T
F
41.
F
RL
2.
2
12
3
0
11.
MLQ
2.
TF
TA
21.
2.
31.
IFRL
DP
2.
IFR
LDP
3
FR
L
1,0
80
1.
IFRL
DP
2.
3.
4
FR
L
7
1.
2.
6.
7.
(
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
50
(
)1.
FR
L
2.

1.
(transactional leading) (transformational leading) (Avolio, 1999)

Full Range Leadership Development Model for School ... · PDF fileคำสำคัญ:...

Documents

Transcript of Full Range Leadership Development Model for School ... · PDF fileคำสำคัญ:...