學校行政家의 價値觀과 行政類型과의 關係

Abstract

Behavior styles of principals and their value oriemeation. 1. Purposes This study was prepared to eluciate the relationship between the leadership behaviour styles and value orientation of principals as educational administrators. The followings are intended purposes stated in more concrete terms : 1) To elucidate the relationship between man-nature orientation and leadership behavior styles. 2) To elucidate time orientation end leadership behavior styles. 3) To elucidate activity orientation and leadership behavior styles. 4) To elucidate hurian relational orientation and leadership styles. 2. Hypotheses The following hypotheses are established to achieve the purposes of the study. 1) There will be no significant difference with regard to such value orientation as (1) Man-nature orientation (2) Time orientation (3) Activity orientation and (4) Felational orientation between the principals with high achievement both in consideration structure and in initiating structure and those with high achievement in consideration structure but with low achievement in initiating structure. 2) There will be no significant difference with regard to such value orientation as (1) Men-nature orientation (2) Time orientation (3) Activity orientation and (4) Relational orientation between the principals With high achievement both in consideration structure and initiating structure and those with low achievement in consideration structure but high achievement it initiating structure. 3) There will be no significant difference with regard to such value orientation as (1) Man-nature orientation (2) Time orientation (3) Activity orientation and (4) Relational orientation between the principals with high achievement in both consideration structure and initiating structure and those with low achievement both in consideration structure and initiating structure. 4) There will be no significant difference with regard to such value orientation as (1) Man-nature orientation (2) Time orientation (3) Activity orientation and (4) Relational orientation between the principals with high achievement in consideration structure but low achievement in initiating structure and those with low achievement in consideration structure but high achievement in intiating structure. 5) There will be no significant difference with regard to such value orientation as (1) Man-nature orientation (2) Time orientation (3) Activity orientation and (4) Relational orientation between the principals with high achievement in consideration structure but low achievement in initiating structure and those with low achievement both in consideration structure and in intiating structure. 6) There will be no significant difference with regard to such value orientation as (1) Man-nature orientation (2) Time orientation (3) Activity orientation and (4) Relational orientation between the principals with achievement in consideration structure but high achievement in initiating structure. 3. Method The questionaire used to test tae above-mentioned hypotheses was made up of two parts : the first part was to test the principals' value orientation, and the second part to identify their leadership behavior style. The questionaire was answered by the 229 principals who were enrolled at the elementary school principals course in institute for the Study of Educational Administration attached to SSE, SNU and the 4878 teachers unders the supervision of the principals. The questionaire was distributed and collected during the period of Aug. 2-Sep.t 10, 1972. The statistical method used to test the hypotheses was T test. 4. Results and Interpretation Among the hypothesis A, sub-hypothesis (1), (2), (4) were accepted at the significance level of p .05 and rejected at the significance level of p .05. Among the hypothesis B, sub-hypothesis (1), (2), (3) were accepted at the significance level of p .05 and rejected at tie significance level of p .05. Among the hypothesis C, sub-hypothesis (2), (3) (4) were accepted at the significance level of p .05 and rejected at the significance level of p .01. Among the hypothesis D, sub-hypothesis (1), (2), (3) were accepted at the significance level of p .05 and rejected at the significance level of p .01. Among the hypothesis E, sub-hypothesis (1), (2), (3), (4) were accepted at the significance level of p .05. Among the hypothesis F, sub-hypothesis (1), (2), (3) were accepted at the significance level of p .05 and rejected at the significance level of P .05. 1) The principals of the effective leadership behavior style (A), those of the initiating structure leadership behavior style (B) and those of consideration structure leadership behavior style do not differ in their man-nature orientation, however, the principals of effective leadership behavior style have more desirable value orientation than those of ineffective leadership behavior style. 2) There is no significant difference between A, B and Do however, A is more desirable in their time orientation than C. 3) There is no significant difference between A, B, C and D in their desirable Activity Orientation. 4) There is no significant difference between A, C and D, however, A, C and D is more desirable in their Relational-Orientation than B. The study was intended to elucidate the relationship between value orientation and the leadership behavior styles of the principals. It is strongly hoped that more extensive study using more relaiable and valid tools of measurement upon random sampled subjects and more intensive study solve the problems which ramain unanswered to the last in this study will be carried out in future.;本硏究는 學校 校長의 價値觀과 行政類型間의 關係를 究明하는데 焦點을 두고 있다. 硏究의 假說은 假說A. 人和와 課業이 다 높은 行政類型의 校長과 人和가 높고 課業이 낮은 行政類型校長間에 ① 自然觀 ② 時間觀 ③ 活動觀 ④ 人間關係觀등의 價値觀에서 意義있는 關係가 없을 것이다. 假說B. 人和와 課業이 다 높은 行政類型의 校長과 人和는 낮고 課業이 높은 行政類型校長間에 ① 自然觀 ② 時間觀 ③ 活動觀 ④ 人間關係觀등의 價値觀에서 意義있는 關係가 없을 것이다. 假說C. 人和와 課業이 다 높은 行政類型의 校長과 人和와 課業이 다 낮은 行政類型校長間에 ① 自然觀 ② 時間觀 ③ 活動觀 ④ 人間關係觀등의 價値觀에서 意義있는 關係가 없을 것이다. 假說D. 人和만 높고 課業이 낮은 行政類型의 校長과 人和는 낮고 課業이 높은 行政類型校長間에 ① 自然觀 ② 時間觀 ③ 活動觀④ 人間關係觀등의 價値觀에서 意義있는 關係가 없을 것이다. 假說E. 人和가 높고 課業이 낮은 行政類型의 校長과 人和와 課業이 다 낮은 行政類型校長間에 ① 自然關 ② 時間觀 ③ 活動關 ④人間關係觀등의 價値觀에서 意義있는 關係가 없을 것이다. 假說F. 人和가 낮고 課業이 높은 行政類型의 校長과 人和와 課業이 다 낮은 行政類型校長間에 ① 自然觀 ② 時間觀 ③ 活動觀 ④ 人間關係觀등의 價値觀에서 意義있는 關係가 없을 것이다. 以上의 假說을 檢證하기 위해서 서울大學校 師節大學 附設 行政硏修院의 初等學校 校長班에서 講習을 받은 229學校의 校長에게 價値觀檢査를, 그리고 이들 校長이 勤務하는 學校의 敎師 4,878名에게 指導者行動記述質問紙를 1972年 8月20日부터 1972年 9月 10日 사이에 配布 및 회수했고, 行政類型別 價値觀間의 t檢證을 했다. 硏究의 結果를 要約하면 1) 效率的 行政類型의 校長과 課業中心行政類型의 校長 및 人和中心行政類型의 校長間에는 自然觀의 發展指向性 程度가 同質的이었으나 效率的 行政類型의 校長은 非效率的 行政類型의 校長보다 發展指向的인 自然觀을 가지고 있다. 2) 效率的 行政類型의 校長과 課業中心 行政類型의 校長 및 非效率的 行政類型의 校長들이 보여준 時間觀의 發展指向性의 程度는 같다. 그러나 效率的 行政類型의 校長은 人和中心 行政類型의 校長보다 發展指向的인 時間觀을 가지고 있다. 3) 效率的 行政類型의 校長 課業中心 行政類型의 校長, 人和中心 行政類型의 校長 및 非效率的 行政類型의 校長들은 同質的인 發展指向的 活動觀을 가지고 있다. 4) 發展指向的 對人關係觀에서 效率的 行政類型의 校長, 人和中心 行政類型의 校長 및 非效率的 行政類型의 校長들은 同質的이었고, 이들 세 行政類型의 校長들은 課業中心 行政類型의 校長보다 發展指向的인 人間關係觀을 가지고 있다.