Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/153210
|
Title: | 國內中小學校長分布式領導及其結果變項之後設分析研究 Meta-Analysis on Distributed Leadership of Primary and Secondary School Principals and Its Outcome Variables in Taiwan |
Authors: | 陳國生 Chen, Kuo-Sheng |
Contributors: | 吳政達 Wu, Cheng-Ta 陳國生 Chen, Kuo-Sheng |
Keywords: | 中小學校長 文獻計量 分布式領導 後設分析 結構洞 Primary and secondary school principals Bibliometrics Distributed leadership Meta-analysis Structural holes |
Date: | 2024 |
Issue Date: | 2024-09-04 14:19:09 (UTC+8) |
Abstract: | 分布式領導自80年代後期開始受到關注,在教育領域,分布式領導被認為是一種能夠有效提升學校效能和教師專業發展的領導模式。因此,本研究旨在通過系統性文獻回顧與後設分析,深入剖析分布式領導於不同地區、教育階段與出版類型,並探討其與學校組織、教師個人及學生學習表現的關聯。本研究首先透過文獻回顧,並以分布式領導研究相關主題之文獻計量分析,運用R程式語言,進行Web of Science與Scopus兩個資料庫之文獻計量與視覺化分析;其後採用後設分析法,蒐集為國內外關於校長分布式領導的實證性量化研究,排除了質性研究及無法提供充分數據的文獻。後設分析資料主要來自於國內期刊與博碩士論文系統,篩選後納入85篇符合條件的研究文獻,使用R程式語言進行後設分析。 透過後設分析,本研究對校長分布式領導與學校組織層級、教師個人層級及學生個人層級變項之間的相關性進行詳細探討。結果顯示: 一、國內外分布式領導研究在近20年受到廣泛關注,近年國外研究於達高峰,我國研究則略見下滑。 二、國內分布式領導及其相關結果變項研究,一致多以教師個人層級變項為研究關注,學生個人層級變項較為少見,而國內以學校效能、教師組織公民行為與教師組織承諾被研究次數居多。 三、分布式領導對學校組織層級變項、教師個人層級變項及學生個人層級之效果量成正向相關,平均效果量而言,學校組織層級變項效果量最高,次為教師個人層級變項,最低為學生個人層級變項。效果量位列前三者為學校組織健康(1.2708)、教師學術樂觀(1.1663)、學校組織文化(1.0512)。 四、國內校長分布式領導與其結果變項之關係研究,受到調查地區及教育階段之調節外,尚待研究進一步釐清其異質性來源,而本研究透過出版偏誤分析考驗,呈現高度可信賴程度。 五、透過文獻計量分析結果,近期國內外分布式領導研究關注主題為「教師領導」,並且研究變項均從學校組織層級轉移至教師(學)領導相關變項之著重。 六、最終根據研究結論在研究產能、多元性、方法與創新性四方面提出後續研究建議。 Since the late 1980s, distributed leadership has gained significant attention as a leadership model that can effectively enhance school performance and teacher professional development in education. This study aims to systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis of distributed leadership across different regions, educational stages, and publication types, exploring its associations with school organizations, individual teachers, and student learning outcomes. Initially, a comprehensive literature review and bibliometric analysis on topics related to distributed leadership were conducted, utilizing R programming to perform bibliometric and visualization analyses of the Web of Science and Scopus databases. Subsequently, a meta-analysis focused on quantitative empirical studies on school principals' distributed leadership. It's important to note that qualitative studies and literature that did not provide sufficient data were excluded, demonstrating the study's focus on rigorous quantitative analysis. The meta-analysis data were primarily sourced from domestic journals and master's and doctoral thesis systems, including 85 studies that met the criteria. The meta-analysis was conducted using R programming. Through the meta-analysis, this study provides an in-depth examination of the correlations between school principals' distributed leadership and variables at the school organizational level, individual teacher level, and individual student level. The results reveal: 1. Over the past two decades, research on distributed leadership has received widespread attention globally, reaching a peak in recent years, while domestic research has shown a slight decline. 2. Domestic studies on distributed leadership and its related outcome variables have predominantly focused on individual teacher-level variables, with fewer studies addressing individual student-level variables. Among the domestic studies, school effectiveness, teacher organizational citizenship behavior, and teacher organizational commitment have been the most frequently researched topics. 3. Distributed leadership positively correlates with effect sizes at the school organizational level, individual teacher level, and individual student level. The effect size is average for school organizational level variables, followed by individual teacher level variables, and lowest for individual student level variables. The top three effect sizes are observed for school organizational health (1.2708), teacher academic optimism (1.1663), and school organizational culture (1.0512). 4. The relationship between domestic principals' distributed leadership and its outcome variables, moderated by the region and educational stage of the survey, requires further research to clarify its sources of heterogeneity. The findings of this study, supported by publication bias analysis, demonstrate a high degree of reliability. 5. According to the bibliometric analysis results, recent research on distributed leadership in domestic and international contexts has increasingly focused on "teacher leadership," with a shift in research variables from school organizational level to teacher (academic) leadership-related variables. 6. Based on the study's conclusions, recommendations for future research are proposed in four areas: research capacity, diversity, methodology, and innovation. |
Reference: | 方慶林(2010)。臺北縣國民小學分布式領導對學生學習態度影響之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *王政暘(2017)。臺北市國民小學校長分布式領導、兼任行政教師情緒勞務與組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *王昭人(2011)。臺北市國小校長分布式領導、教師效能感與教師組織承諾關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *王惠萱(2011)。國民小學校長分佈式領導、教師創新教學與教師幸福感關係之研究:以桃園縣為例。﹝碩士論文。中原大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *王環鈴、王文科、王智弘(2011)。學校分布式領導與創新經營之研究:以台中市國民小學為例。彰化師大教育學報,20,1-20。https://doi.org/10.6769/JENCUE.201112.0001 王麗雅(2011)。國民小學校長分布式領導與教師服務士氣之研究:以教師內外控信念為調節變項。﹝碩士論文。國立臺南大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *田維仁(2011)。國民小學分布式領導與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。逢甲大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *向家逸(2010)。分佈式領導、教師組織公民行為與教師集體效能感關係之研究:以桃園縣國小為例。﹝碩士論文。中原大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *江志軒(2011)。苗栗縣國民小學校長分布式領導、教師組織公民行為與教師工作滿意度關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *何建霖(2009)。國民小學學校分佈式領導、教師同僚專業共享與學生學習表現之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立中正大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *何嘉惠(2018)。國民小學校長分布式領導、教師彰權益能與教學創新關係之研究。﹝博士論文。臺北市立大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *余政達(2013)。分布式領導、溝通行為、教師工作滿意度與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立屏東教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *余秋玉(2012)。臺北市國民小學校長分布式領導與教師專業學習社群關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 吳進利(2014)。新北市國民小學主任分布式領導與處室組長工作投入及工作壓力關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立臺北教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *呂紹弘(2020)。國民中學校長分布式領導、學校組織文化與學校創新經營效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 呂佳盈(2019)。我國高中職以下學校校長分布式領導之後設分析研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 呂俊宏(2013)。花蓮縣國民小學校長分布式領導與學校效能之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立東華大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *呂俊宏、陳成宏(2015)。花蓮縣國民小學校長分布式領導與學校效能之研究。學校行政,95,1-26。https://doi.org/10.3966/160683002015010095001 李尚儒(2010)。國民小學校長分佈式領導、學校知識創造對學生學習表現影響之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立新竹教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 李杰、陳超美(2017)。CiteSpace科技文本挖掘及可视化。首都經濟貿易大學出版社。 *李奕芸(2018)。臺北市國民小學校長分布式領導與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 李茂能(2015)。傳統整合分析理論與實務:Ess & EXCEL。五南。 *李柏賢(2023)。新北市公立國民中學校長分布式領導、教師學術樂觀與教師教學效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *李重毅(2013)。校長分布式領導、教師專業社群運作與學校創新經營效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *李晏禎(2017)。高雄市國民中學校長分布式領導、 教師工作投入與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *李婉華(2011)。新北市公立國民小學分佈式領導、教師自我效能感與集體教師效能感關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。輔仁大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 李豪朕(2011)。國民小學校長分佈式領導、學校知識創新與ICT運用關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立新竹教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *李麗珍(2011)。國小校長分布式領導與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立屏東教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *沈志杰(2015)。宜蘭縣國民中學校長分布式領導、學校創新經營與教師教學效能之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立新竹教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *周竹一(2023)。國民小學校長分布式領導、教師專業發展與學校效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *周宜儒(2015)。國民小學校長分布式領導與教師幸福感關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。逢甲大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林忠仁(2010)。國民小學校長分佈領導、灰猩猩效應與教師專業學習社群關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立臺北教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林松德(2014)。新北市國民中學校長分散式領導與教師學術樂觀關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林欣瑩(2016)。高雄市國中校長分散式領導、教師賦權增能與學校競爭優勢關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 林志奇(2011)。臺北縣市國民小學分布式領導與教師知識分享行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林奕成(2018)。國民小學校長分布式領導、教師專業學習社群與學校效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立中正大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林姸伶(2017)。高雄市國民中學校長分布式領導、 學校文化與教師學術樂觀關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林建宏(2016)。高級中等學校分散式領導、組織變革與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *林聖杰(2017)。高雄市國小校長分布式領導、教師幸福感與工作投入關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *邱明珠(2013)。國民中小學校長人格特質、分布式領導與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。中國科技大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *金玫珍(2016)。國民小學分布式領導、學校組織文化與學校效能關係之研究---以桃園市為例。﹝碩士論文。中原大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *凃景閔(2011)。國民小學分布式領導與教師組織承諾關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。逢甲大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *柯淑偉(2016)。技術型高中校長分散式領導、組織創新氣氛與創新教學行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立臺北科技大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *洪國芳(2022)。國民小學校長分布式領導、學校組織公平與教師組織承諾關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *洪毓澤(2016)。國民中學校長分布式領導、教師專業社群學習與教師教學效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *洪碧梅(2016)。國民小學校長分布式領導、組織信任與教師工作滿意度關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *徐合慶(2015)。國小校長分布式領導、教師組織承諾與ICT運用關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立新竹教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *涂志豪(2015)。高雄市國民小學校長分布式領導與教師工作投入、疏離感關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 袁亭雅(2020)。校長分布式領導與學校效能關係之後設分析。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *袁建銘(2017)。高雄市國民中學校長分布式領導、學校組織氣氛與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 馬信行(2002)。教育科學導論。臺北市:元照。 *馬曉蓁(2013)。新北市國民小學校長分布式領導與學校創新經營關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 秦夢群(2002)。知識經濟在教育發展上的角色與策略。中等教育,53(3),64-82。 張奕華、許正妹、顏弘欽(2011)。「國民小學教師學術樂觀量表」之發展與衡量。測驗學刊,58,261-289。 *張素花(2012)。國民小學校長分布式領導、教師情緒勞務對教師教學效能影響之研究。﹝博士論文。國立臺北教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *張維哲(2022)。桃園市國民小學校長分布式領導、社會支持與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。中原大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 張雅婷(2024)。校長分布式領導、教師對校長之信任、教師工作滿意度與組織承諾之關係研究:後設分析取向結構方程模式之應用。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 張慶勳(2006)。學校組織文化與領導。臺北市:五南。 許崇憲(2013)。r效果量加權值的選擇對後設分析結果的影響。測驗學刊,60(4),627-648。 *許聰顯(2014)。國民小學校長分布式領導、學校組織公平與教師組織公民行為之關係。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *速春玲(2011)。國民小學分布式領導與教師工作滿意度關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。逢甲大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳世栓(2021)。臺中市國民中學校長分布式領導、教師知覺組織支持與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳玄康、何高志(2023)。以校長分佈式領導提升工作滿意度之策略。學校行政,144,083-103。 *陳宇軒(2014)。桃園縣國民中學校長分布式領導、教師心理賦權與教師學術樂觀關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 陳志偉、湯家偉(2020)。國民小學校長分布式領導對教師教學效能之影響:以教師專業學習社群為中介變項。教育研究月刊,317,035-055。 陳佳雯(2020)。臺北市國民小學教師知覺校長分布式領導、學校組織氣氛與學校組織執行力關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳姵臻(2016)。新北市國民小學學校分布式領導與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳美珠(2018)。雲林縣國民小學校長人格特質、分布式領導與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立嘉義大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳郁雯(2017)。臺北市國民中學校長分散式領導與教師學術樂觀之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳國清(2011)。宜蘭縣國民小學校長分布式領導與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立臺北教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳國龍(2012)。高雄市國民小學校長分佈式領導行為與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳慧儒(2017)。臺北市國民小學校長分布式領導與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *陳麗捐(2012)。校長分布式領導對組織健康影響之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *黃玉貞(2012)。國民小學分布式領導、教師組織承諾與學校創新經營效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *黃秀玲(2012)。國民中學校長分布式領導、教師人格特質與學校創新經營效能關係之研究:以桃園縣為例。﹝碩士論文。中原大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *黃明裕(2017)。國小教師知覺校長分布式領導、教師幸福感與學校效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *黃國政(2015)。新北市國民小學校長分布式領導、教師工作壓力與學校創新經營效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 黃建翔,吳清山(2018)。國小校長知識領導影響學校創新經營效能之關係─以資料導向決定為中介變項。教育學報,46(1),1-21。 *黃敏榮(2013)。高級中等學校分布式領導、學校創新經營與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *黃鼎強(2011)。高雄市國民中學校長分布式領導與學校效能之相關研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *黃曉貞(2014)。雲林縣國民小學校長分布式領導、學校組織氣氛與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立嘉義大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *楊惠菁(2013)。高雄市國民中學校長分佈式領導與組織創新、組織承諾關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 楊慶麟(2019)。國民小學校長完全領導、分布式領導、教師組織公民行為與教師創新教學關係之研究。學校行政,119,1-30。 *廖梅君(2022)。分布式領導、教師協作和教師創新行為的關係之多層次結構方程模型分析:以TALIS 2018臺灣資料為例。﹝博士論文。國立臺中教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *廖雅蘭(2011)。國民中學分布式領導與學校組織健康關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。逢甲大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *翟家甫(2014)。公立高中校長分布式領導與學校創新經營之研究—以臺中市為例。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *劉文章(2010)。臺北縣國民小學分布式領導對教師學術樂觀影響之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 劉姿君(2016)。大臺北地區國民小學分布式領導對教育成效影響之研究。﹝博士論文。國立臺灣師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *劉瑞珠(2010)。新竹縣、市國民小學分布式領導與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立新竹教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *蔡來淑(2015)。校長分布式領導、團隊信任對學校效能影響之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *蔡玲玲(2014)。私立高中職學校校長分布式領導、學校組織健康與學校效能關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *蔡舒文(2012)。臺北市國民小學校長分布式領導與教師組織承諾關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *鄭友泰(2023)。桃園市國民小學校長分布式領導教師組織公民行為與CRPD導向融合教育成效關係之研究。﹝博士論文。中原大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *鄭卉玶(2012)。國民小學分布式領導對教師賦權增能影響之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *鄭旭宏(2022)。臺北市公立國民中學校長分布式領導、教師專業學習社群與教師組織承諾關係之研究。教育行政與評鑑學刊,32,79-116。 *賴珮珊(2018)。臺北市特殊教育學校校長分布式領導與教師專業學習社群關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 薛淵祥(2016)。高雄市國民小學教育人員分布式領導、知識創造與學校競爭力關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *薛雅文、賴志峰(2013)。國民小學分布式領導與學校組織文化之關係研究。學校行政,86,20-42。https://doi.org/10.3966/160683002013070086002 *薛雅玲(2016)。高雄市國小校長分布式領導、教師幸福感與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *謝文貴、黃旭鈞(2016)。國民小學分布式領導對學校效能影響之研究──以資料導向為中介變項。學校行政,105,63-84。 *謝傳崇、王瓊滿(2011)。國民小學校長分佈式領導、教師組織公民行為對學生學習表現影響之研究。新竹教育大學教育學報,28(1),35-66。https://doi.org/10.7044/NHCUEA.201106.0035 *謝傳崇、李尚儒(2011)。校長分佈式領導對學生學習表現影響之研究─以學校知識創造為中介變項。教育理論與實踐學刊,23,149-181。https://doi.org/10.7038/JETP.201106.0150 謝傳崇、賴協志、徐合慶(2016)。國民小學校長分布式領導、教師組織承諾與資訊通信科技運用關係之研究。教育行政論壇,8(2),1-23。 *鍾佳容(2013)。屏東縣國民中學校長分布式領導、創新經營、組織學習與學校效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立屏東教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *簡志明(2010)。學校分佈式領導與教師工作滿意度關係之研究:以臺北縣國小為例。﹝碩士論文。臺北市立教育大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *羅昌龍(2017)。臺北市國民中學校長分布式領導與教師組織公民行為之相關研究。學校行政,112,102-131。 *羅昌龍(2018)。臺北市國民中學校長分布式領導、學校組織健康與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。﹝博士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 蘇玲慧(2023)。分布式領導、教師組織公民行為與學校效能之關係研究:以後設分析為途徑。人文社會科學研究:教育類,17(1),31-55。 *蘇恆毅(2015)。國民中學校長分布式領導與教師組織承諾關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立嘉義大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 *鐘啟哲(2014)。國民中學校長分布式領導、教師組織公民行為與學校創新經營效能關係之研究。﹝碩士論文。國立政治大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 Adıgüzelli, Y. (2016). Examining The Relationship Between Distributed Leadership and Organizational Trust According to Opinions of Teachers. Education & Science/Egitim ve Bilim, 41(185). Anderson, S. E. (2009). Positioning the principals in patterns of school leadership distribution. In Distributed leadership according to the evidence (pp. 129-154). Routledge. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics , 11(4), 959-975. Aziz, A., Parveen, Z., & Shehzadi, K. (2022). Prevalence of distributed leadership in secondary schools of Punjab: Perspectives of teachers. Pakistan Social Sciences Review, 6(2), 781-792. Azmat, F., Lim, W. M., Moyeen, A., Voola, R., & Gupta, G. (2023). Convergence of business, innovation, and sustainability at the tipping point of the sustainable development goals. Journal of Business Research, 167, 114170. Bektaş, F., Kılınç, A. Ç., & Gümüş, S. (2022). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher professional learning: mediating roles of teacher trust in principal and teacher motivation. Educational studies, 48(5), 602-624. Bellibas, M. S., & Liu, Y. (2018). The effects of principals’ perceived instructional and distributed leadership practices on their perceptions of school climate. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(2), 226-244. Bennett, J. (2003). Teaching and learning science: A guide to recent research and its applications. Routledge. Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5-25. Berkovich, I. (2020). Micro-politics, senior management teams, and principals’ inner circle: a structural exploration. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 19(2), 290-303. Berkovich-Ohana, A., Dor-Ziderman, Y., Trautwein, F. M., Schweitzer, Y., Nave, O., Fulder, S., & Ataria, Y. (2020). The hitchhiker’s guide to neurophenomenology–The case of studying self boundaries with meditators. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1680. Bolden, R. (2011). Distributed leadership in organizations: A review of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 251-269. Bolden, R., Petrov, G., & Gosling, J. (2009). Distributed leadership in higher education: Rhetoric and reality. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(2), 257-277. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. New York, NY: Wiley. Bouwmans T., Javed S., Sultana M. & Jung S. K. (2019). Deep neural network concepts for background subtraction:A systematic review and comparative evaluation. Neural Networks, 117, 8-66. Burch, P., & Spillane, J. P. (2003). Elementary school leadership strategies and subject matter: Reforming mathematics and literacy instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 103(5), 519-535. Camburn, E. M., & Han, S. W. (2009). Investigating connections between distributed leadership and instructional change. In Distributed leadership: Different perspectives (pp. 25-45). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Camburn, E. M., Spillane, J. P., & Sebastian, J. (2010). Assessing the utility of a daily log for measuring principal leadership practice. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 707-737. Cheung, S. F., & Chan, D. K. S. (2004). Dependent effect sizes in meta-analysis: incorporating the degree of interdependence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 780. Cobo, M. J., Lõpez-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 63, 1609–1630. doi: 10.1002/asi.22688. Daniëls, E., Hondeghem, A., & Dochy, F. (2019). A review on leadership and leadership development in educational settings. Educational Research Review, 27, 110-125. Diamond, J. B. (2013). Distributed leadership: Examining issues of race, power, and inequality. In Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity (pp. 83-104). Routledge. Diamond, J. B., & Spillane, J. P. (2016). School leadership and management from a distributed perspective: A 2016 retrospective and prospective. Management in Education, 30(4), 147-154. Douglas, W., & Jeffrey, L. (2018). Building the "Bridge": Teacher Leadership for Learning and Distributed Organizational Capacity for Instructional Improvement. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 9(2), 22-47. Edwards, G. (2011). Concepts of community: A framework for contextualizing distributed leadership. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 301-312. Ellis, P. D. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Farooq, R. (2023). Knowledge management and performance: a bibliometric analysis based on Scopus and WOS data (1988–2021). Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(7), 1948-1991. Farooq, R. (2023). Mapping the field of knowledge management: a bibliometric analysis using R. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 53(6), 1178-1206. Flessa, J. (2009). Educational micropolitics and distributed leadership. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(3), 331-349. Fuller, K., Parsons, S., MacNab, N., & Thomas, H. (2013). How far is leadership distributed in extended services provision?. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(5), 598-619. Furstenau, L. B., Sott, M. K., Homrich, A. J. O., Kipper, L. M., Al Abri, A. A., Cardoso, T. F., et al. (2020). “20 Years of Scientific Evolution of Cyber Security: a Science Mapping,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, (Dubai: University of Santa Cruz do Sul). Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Sage. Gómez-Hurtado, I., González-Falcón, I., Coronel-Llamas, J. M., & García-Rodríguez, M. D. P. (2020). Distributing leadership or distributing tasks? The practice of distributed leadership by management and its limitations in two Spanish secondary schools. Education Sciences, 10(5), 122. Gordon, T. (2010). Teacher effectiveness training: The program proven to help teachers bring out the best in students of all ages. Crown Archetype. Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 423-451. Gronn, P. (2009). Leadership configurations. Leadership, 5(3), 381-394. Gronn, P. (2015). The view from inside leadership configurations. Human Relations, 68(4), 545-560. Gronn, P. (2016). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 423-451. Hairon, S. (2019). Conclusion: Leading Schools in Complexity. School Leadership and Educational Change in Singapore, 215-220. Hall, D. J. (2013). The strange case of the emergence of distributed leadership in schools in England. Educational Review, 65(4), 467-487. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-351. Halverson, R. (2003). Systems of practice: How leaders use artifacts to create professional community in schools. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://web.education.wisc.edu/halverson/wp-content/uploads/sites/33/2012/09/Halverson-PLC-Book-Chapter-7.pdf Hargreaves, A., & Ainscow, M. (2015). The top and bottom of leadership and change. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(3), 42-48. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2009). Distributed leadership: democracy or delivery?. In Distributed leadership: Different perspectives (pp. 181-193). Springer Netherlands. Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: According to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 172-188. Harris, A. (2013). Distributed leadership: Friend or foe?. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(5), 545-554. Harris, A., & DeFlaminis, J. (2016). Distributed leadership in practice: Evidence, misconceptions and possibilities. Management in Education, 30(4), 141-146. Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., & Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of educational change, 8, 337-347. Harris, J. R. (2011). The nurture assumption: Why children turn out the way they do. Simon and Schuster. Hartley, D. (2009). Education policy, distributed leadership and socio‐cultural theory. Educational Review, 61(2), 139-150. Hartley, D. (2010). The management of education and the social theory of the firm: From distributed leadership to collaborative community. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 42(4), 345-361. Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2010). Collaborative leadership effects on school improvement: Integrating unidirectional-and reciprocal-effects models. The Elementary School Journal, 111(2), 226-252. Hickey, N., Flaherty, A., & Mannix McNamara, P. (2022). Distributed leadership: A scoping review mapping current empirical research. Societies, 12(1), 15. Ho, J., & Ng, D. (2017). Tensions in distributed leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(2), 223-254. Hopkins, M., & Spillane, J. P. (2014). Schoolhouse teacher educators: Structuring beginning teachers’ opportunities to learn about instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 327-339. Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2005). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: McGraw- Hill. Jensen, P. R., & Meisenbach, R. J. (2015). Alternative organizing and (in) visibility: Managing tensions of transparency and autonomy in a nonprofit organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 29(4), 564-589. Johnson, G., Dempster, N., & Wheeley, E. (2016). Distributed leadership: Theory and practice dimensions in systems, schools, and communities. Leadership in diverse learning contexts, 3-31. Jones, S., Harvey, M., Hamilton, J., Bevacqua, J., Egea, K., & McKenzie, J. (2017). Demonstrating the impact of a distributed leadership approach in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 39(2), 197-211. Joo, Y. H. (2020). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher professionalism: The case of Korean middle schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 99, 101500. Karadağ, E. (2015). Leadership and Organizational Outcomes Meta-Analysis of Empirical Studies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Karadağ, E. (2020). The effect of educational leadership on students’ achievement: A cross-cultural meta-analysis research on studies between 2008 and 2018. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(1), 49-64. King, M. B., & Bouchard, K. (2011). The capacity to build organizational capacity in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(6), 653-669. Klar, H. W., Huggins, K. S., Hammonds, H. L., & Buskey, F. C. (2016). Fostering the capacity for distributed leadership: A post-heroic approach to leading school improvement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 19(2), 111-137. Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007). Distributing leadership to make schools smarter. Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto. Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529-561. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School leadership & management, 40(1), 5-22. Leydesdorff, L. (2007). Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9). Liu, Y., & Werblow, J. (2019). The operation of distributed leadership and the relationship with organizational commitment and job satisfaction of principals and teachers: A multi-level model and meta-analysis using the 2013 TALIS data. International Journal of Educational Research, 96, 41-55. Liu, Y., & Werblow, J. (2019). The operation of distributed leadership and the relationship with organizational commitment and job satisfaction of principals and teachers: A multi-level model and meta-analysis using the 2013 TALIS data. International Journal of Educational Research, 96, 41-55. Loder, T. L., & Spillane, J. P. (2006). Big change question: How do leaders’ own lives and their educational contexts, influence their responses to the dilemmas and tensions they face in their daily work?. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 91-92. López-Robles, N. G.-R., Otegi-Olaso, J., Cobo, M. J., Furstenau, L. B., Sott, M. K., Robles, R., et al. (2020). The relationship between project management and industry 4.0: Bibliometric analysis of main research areas through Scopus. Proc. Res. Educ. Project Manage. 2020, 56–60. Lumby, J. (2013). Distributed leadership: The uses and abuses of power. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(5), 581-597. Lumby, J. (2016). Distributed leadership as fashion or fad. Management in Education, 30(4), 161-167. Lumby, J. (2019). Distributed leadership and bureaucracy. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47(1), 5-19. Murad, M. H., Asi, N., Alsawas, M., & Alahdab, F. (2016). New evidence pyramid. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 21(4), 125-127. Nedelcu, A. (2013). Transformational approach to school leadership: Contribution to continued improvement of education. Manager, (17), 237-244. Neumerski, C. M. (2013). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here?. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 310-347. Nguyen, D., Harris, A. and Ng, D. (2020). A review of the empirical research on teacher leadership (2003–2017): Evidence, patterns and implications. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(1), 60-80. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2018-0023 Pak, K., & Desimone, L. M. (2019). How do states implement college-and career-readiness standards? A distributed leadership analysis of standards-based reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(3), 447-476. Paul, M., & Leibovici, L. (2014). Systematic review or meta‐analysis? Their place in the evidence hierarchy. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 20(2), 97-100. Penlington, C., Kington, A., & Day, C. (2008). Leadership in improving schools: A qualitative perspective. School Leadership and Management, 28(1), 65-82. Pigott, T. (2012). Advances in meta-analysis. US: Springer Science & Business Media. Pitts, V. M., & Spillane, J. P. (2009). Using social network methods to study school leadership. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 32(2), 185-207. Portin, B., Schneider, P., DeArmond, M., & Gundlach, L. (2003). Making sense of leading schools: A study of the school principalship. Center on Reinventing Public Education. Pustejovsky, J. E., & Spillane, J. P. (2009). Question-order effects in social network name generators. Social Networks, 31(4), 221-229. Riggan, M. (2009). An analysis of team behavior in the distributed leadership project. In American Educational Research Association annual meeting, San Diego, CA. Riggan, M., & Supovitz, J. A. (2008). Interpreting, supporting, and resisting change: the geography of leadership in reform settings. The implementation gap: Understanding reform in high schools, 103, 125. Robinson, V. M. J. (2008). Forging the links between distributed leadership and educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration. (Special Issue on Distributed Leadership: Guest Editor Alma Harris), 46(2), 241-256. doi: 10.1108/09578230810863299 Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Science. Sage. Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1986). Meta-analytic procedures for combining studies with multiple effect sizes. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 400-406. Schwarzer, G. (2018). General package for meta-analysis. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/meta/meta.pdf. Sott, M.K., Bender, M.S., Furstenau, L.B., Machado, L.M., Cobo, M.J., & Bragazzi, N.L. (2020). 100 Years of Scientific Evolution of Work and Organizational Psychology: A Bibliometric Network Analysis from 1919 to 2019. Front. Psychol., 11, 598676. Sharpe, D. (1997). Of apples and oranges, file drawers and garbage: Why validity issues in meta-analysis will not go away. Clinical Psychology Review, 17(8), 881-901. Slavin, R., & Smith, D. (2009). The relationship between sample sizes and effect size in systematic reviews in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 500-506. Spillane, J. P. (2004). Educational Leadership. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(2), 169-172. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. In Rethinking schooling (pp. 208-242). Routledge. Spillane, J. P. (2012). Distributed leadership. John Wiley & Sons. Spillane, J. P., & Coldren, A. F. (2015). Diagnosis and design for school improvement: Using a distributed perspective to lead and manage change. Teachers College Press. Spillane, J. P., & Diamond, J. B. (Eds.). (2007). Distributed leadership in practice. Teachers College, Columbia University. Spillane, J. P., & Zuberi, A. (2009). Designing and piloting a leadership daily practice log: Using logs to study the practice of leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(3), 375-423. Spillane, J. P., Harris, A., Jones, M., & Mertz, K. (2015). Opportunities and challenges for taking a distributed perspective: Novice school principals’ emerging sense of their new position. British Educational Research Journal, 41(6), 1068-1085. Spillane, J. P., Healey, K., Parise, L. M., & Kenney, A. (2011). A distributed perspective on learning leadership. Leadership and learning, 159-171. Stoll, L., & Louis, K. S. (2007). Professional learning communities. McGraw-Hill Education. Sun, A., & Xia, J. (2018). Teacher-perceived distributed leadership, teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction: A multilevel SEM approach using the 2013 TALIS data. International Journal of Educational Research, 92, 86-97. Supovitz, J. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 211-227. Supovitz, J. A., & Riggan, M. (2012). Building a foundation for school leadership: An evaluation of the Annenberg distributed leadership project. University of Pennsylvania Tam, A. C. F. (2019). Conceptualizing distributed leadership: Diverse voices of positional leaders in early childhood education. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 18(4), 701-718. Tian, M., Risku, M., & Collin, K. (2016). A meta-analysis of distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013: Theory development, empirical evidence and future research focus. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(1), 146-164. Torrance, I. (2013). Metapoetry in Euripides. Oxford University Press. Torres, D. G. (2019). Distributed leadership, professional collaboration, and teachers’ job satisfaction in US schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 111-123. Valentine, J. C., Pigott, T. D., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35(2), 215-247. Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3),1-48. Viechtbauer, W. (2017). Meta-analysis package for R. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/metafor/metafor.pdf Walker, C. M. (2022). Examining practices of distributed leadership in two urban charter schools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Southeastern Louisiana University. Wang, Y., & Bowers, A. J. (2016). Mapping the field of educational administration research: A journal citation network analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 54(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2015-0013 Wong, B., Hairon, S., & Ng, P. T. (2019). School Leadership and Educational Change in Singapore. Springer. Woods, P. A. (2016). Authority, power and distributed leadership. Management in Education, 30(4), 155-160. Woods, P. A. (2021). Democratic leadership. Oxford Encyclopedia of Educational Administration. Woods, P. A., & Gronn, P. (2009). Nurturing democracy: The contribution of distributed leadership to a democratic organizational landscape. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(4), 430-451. Woods, P. A., & Roberts, A. (2013). Distributed leadership and social justice. University of Hertfordshire. |
Description: | 博士 國立政治大學 教育學系 104152512 |
Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104152512 |
Data Type: | thesis |
Appears in Collections: | [教育學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
File |
Size | Format | |
251201.pdf | 20830Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|