رضوان حسینقلی زاده

Despite the importance of continuous professional development for schools principals, researches show that their professional development approaches need to be review and move towards programs based on collective learning. Therefore, the main goal of this research was to provide a model for professional learning communities of elementary school principals. The present study was conducted using the qualitative research method of grounded theory and interviews with a targeted sample, including 29 key informants (15 university professors and 14 school principals) with relevant research records. The interviews were analyzed using the coding methods of Strauss and Corbin (1998). Four criteria of data authenticity, transferability, reliability and verifiability were used to check the validity of the data. After conducting interviews and open, axial and selective coding; The research results showed 18 general selection codes including causal conditions (collective learning culture; feeling the need for collective learning; leadership and management styles), contextual conditions (dynamic and flexible organizational structure; infrastructures and facilities; empathy and common goals; Encouraging principals towards learning communities), intervening conditions (teaching soft skills; suitable time and place for meetings related to communities; management knowledge; correct plan and program), central phenomenon (professional learning communities), Strategies for developing professional learning communities (suitable work space; professional learning; the existence of a supportive policy for learning communities; modeling of the experiences of successful schools) and consequences (organizational consequences; student success; professional development of teachers) that reflected the pattern of professional learning communities of primary school principals and the relationships between its different dimensions.

The main question of the present research was theorizing controversies and their reason in educational administration studies. The search for the answer to this question was done by genealogical method. In the present thesis, an attempt was made to investigate the end and method of theorizing and its supposed reasons as the two main topics of discussion in this controversy, by Foucaultian genealogy. Following the search for the roots, this study led to the discovery of the sources of theorizing, including scientific power and governmentality, three conflicting discourses of theorizing, and two major ruptures in the theorizing process of educational administration studies. The discourses were identified and divided into three categories: “conventionalism”, “sanctification of science” and “evolution”, and the ruptures were categorized as “methodological rupture” and “teleological rupture”. According to the findings of this study, it can be concluded that educational administration studies are on the one hand considered by experts in the fields of education and social sciences, and on the other hand, are favored by politicians and rulers as a political tool for governments. Contrary to the claims of many competing theories, the emergence of theory in educational administration studies in its global origin has been a tool of political governance rather than seeking to achieve ideal goals such as awareness, welfare, educational justice, democracy, freedom and education. Following the expansion of colonial territories in the European and American governments, facing the huge population of colonized countries such as India and China and the ineffectiveness of previous models of governance, technological tools of discipline from authoritarian and force-based governance are changed to governance based on the education and training of individuals in accordance with the demands of the ruler systems. In other words, according to the conflicting discourses and double ruptures, theorizing in educational administration studies from Foucault’s point of view as a technology of discipline in the modern era, where it has followed political purposes, has had no advantage for this field of study, and every theory with a new claim has increased the ambiguity and confusion in its theoretical nature.

This study sought to explore the core values articulated by principals with a focus on school leadership models. Considering the importance of values in educational leadership, very little research underpins the assumption of values in coupling with school leadership models. Therefore, this study employed a sequential explanatory, mixed-method research design in the Razaviyeh region located in the city of Mashhad, Iran to provide information on that topic. Data were drawn from a combination of methods, both quantitative (questionnaires administered to 350 teachers in 63 schools) and qualitative (a semi-structured interview with twenty school principals). The quantitative results first provided evidence consistent with the previous research from centralized education systems, suggesting the managerial leadership model is the dominant model in schools. The qualitative results indicated the core values articulated by principals and were categorized into terminal and instrumental values in each school leadership model.

در این پژوهش از روش توصیفی- پیمایشی استفاده شد. جامعه آماری این پژوهش را کلیه معلمان دوره  ابتدایی نواحی 4، 5 و 6 شهر مشهد تشکیل دادند. حجم نمونه شامل 335 نفر از معلمان دوره  ابتدایی در نواحی چهار، پنج و شش  بودند که با روش نمونه گیری خوشه ای از سه ناحیه برخوردار، نیمه برخوردار و نا برخوردار  انتخاب شدند.  نخست، به بررسی وضعیت الگوی رهبری توزیعی در مدارس موردمطالعه با استفاده از  پرسشنامه Spillane (2000) پرداخته شد. در مرحله بعد، نظر به نتایج به دست آمده از پیمایش، مهم ترین زمینه های استقرار رهبری توزیعی از طریق مصاحبه فردی و کانونی با مطلعان کلیدی شناسایی و استخراج شدند. به طورکلی نتایج به دست آمده حاکی از تفاوت معنی دار بین وضعیت موجود و وضعیت مطلوب رهبری توزیعی به ویژه در مؤلفه تصمیم گیری مشارکتی در مدارس ابتدایی مشهد می باشد. علاوه براین، نتایج نشان داد که  استقرار رهبری توزیعی در مدارس ابتدایی تابع بروز و ظهور ویژگی هایی مانند چشم انداز، سازمان دهی، فرهنگ خوش بینی، ساختار توانمندساز و دانش آموز محوری می باشد.