School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future

Ali Sabancı; Ebru Burcu Çimili Gök; Gülnar Özyıldırım

EN TR

School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to find out electronic communication preferences of private and state school managers, to explore the reasons for their choices and to determine their implications about the future of electronic communication. The research was based on phenomenological approach which is a qualitative research design. For this purpose, eight private and state school managers were interviewed using standardized open-ended interviews. Their views were analyzed using content analysis technique, reported and evaluated accordingly. Consequently, electronic communication devises have seemed to be settled in the lives of the school managers firmly and permanently. The findings proved that electronic communication preferences of the managers differ in their communication with teachers, superiors, parents and students. School managers implied that 21st century is candidate to open a new gate for new implementations in which new ways of teaching and learning are likely to occur.

Keywords

school effectiveness,communication,communication in schools,electronic communication

References

Armengol, X., Fernandez, V. Simo, P. & Sallan J. M. (2015). An Examination of the Effects of Self-Regulatory Focus on the Perception of the Media Richness: The Case of E-Mail. International Journal of Business Communication. 1 –14
Akbaba-Altun, S., & Gürer, M. D. (2008). School administrators’ perceptions of their roles regarding information technology classrooms. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 33, 35-54.
Arokiasamy, A. R. A., bin Abdullah, A. G. K., & Ismail, A. B. (2014). Correlation between cultural perceptions, leadership style and Ict usage by school principals in Malaysia. TOJET, 13(3).
Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W. , Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C. & LaGanke J. S. (2002). Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 156–179.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Carlson, J. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 153-170.
Cox, D., & McLeod, S. (2013). Social media strategies for school principals. NASSP Bulletin, 0192636513510596.
Craig, R. T. (1981). Generalization of Scott's index of intercoder agreement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(2), 260-264.
Daft, R,, & Lengel, R. (1983). Information Richness: A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organization Design. Technical Report, Contract or Grant Number: N00014-83-C-0025. Department of Management Texas A&M University.
Daft, R,, & Lengel, R. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32: 554-571.

Daft, R,, & Lengel, R. and Trevino, L. K. (1987). Message Equivocality, Media Selection, and Manager Performance: Implications for Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 11, 355-368.
Davidson, J. & Olson, M. (2003). School leadership in networked schools: deciphering the impact of large technical systems on education, International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 6:3, 261-281.
De Vries, R. E., Van den Hooff, B., & de Ridder, J. A. (2006). Explaining knowledge sharing the role of team communication styles, job satisfaction, and performance beliefs. Communication Research, 33(2), 115-135.
Eleanor, B. & Taylor, J. A. (2000). Information and Communication Technologies: Reshaping Voluntary Organizations? Nonprofit Management and Leadership 11 ( 2 ): 131 – 43 .
Etudor-Eyo, E., Ante, H. A., & Emah, I. E. (2011). Use of Ict and communication effectiveness among secondary school administrators. Journal of Education & Sociology, 2(1), 20-27.
Gächter, S. (2013). “Rationality, Social Preferences, and Strategic Decision-making from a Behavioral Economics Perspective” in The Handbook of Rational Choice Social Research (eds. Rafael Wittek, Tom A. B. Snijders and Victor Nee). Pp. 33-71. Stanford University Press Stanford, California
Hanna R. C., Crittenden , V. L. and Crittenden, W. F. (2013). Social Learning Theory: A Multicultural Study of Influences on Ethical Behavior. Journal of Marketing Education. 35(1) 18–25
Landis, J. R., Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33:159-174.
McNabb, M. L., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Hawkes, M. (1999). Technology Connections for School Improvement. Planner's Handbook. North Central Regional Educational Lab., IL.:Oak Brook. Retrieved on May 3, 2015 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED437908.pdf
Makewa, L., Meremo, J., Role, E., & Role, J. (2013). ICT in secondary school administration in rural southern Kenya: An educator’s eye on its importance and use. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 9(2).
Markus, M. L. (1994). Finding a happy medium: Explaining the negative effects of electronic communication on social life at work. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14, 119–149.
Mason J. (2002). Qualitative researching. (2nd edition), London: Sage Publications.
Minsky B. D. & Marin, D. B. (1999) Why Faculty Members Use E-Mail: The Role of Individual Differences in Channel Choice. The journal of Business Communication, 36(2), 194-217)
Mitchell, R. B. Crawford, M. C. and Madden, R. B. (1985). An investigation of the impact of electronic communication systems on organizational communication patterns. Journal of Business Communication, 2, 9-16.
Mojgan, A, Kamariah A. B. , Wong S. L. , Bahaman A. S. & Foo S. F. (2009) Technology and school leadership. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(2), 235-248.
Otondo, R. F., Van Scotterb, J. R., Allen, D. G., & Palvia, P. (2008). The complexity of richness: Media, message, and communication outcomes. Information & Management, 45(1), 21-30.
Patton, M., Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research. (2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications.
Pazos, P., Chung, J.M., and Micari, M., (2013). Instant messaging as a task-support tool in information technology organizations. Journal of Business Communication, 50(1), 68-86.
Petiz, S. Ramos, F. and Roseiro, P. (2015). The use of information and communication technologies in organizational learning practices: A Research Study in an Innovation-oriented Portuguese Organization. iJAC, 8, 1.
Roberts, R. (2000) From Know-how to Show-how? Questioning the Role of Information and Communication Technologies in Knowledge Transfer. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 12(4), 429-443.
Roberts, L., & Mancuso, S. V. (2014). What kind of international school leaders are in demand around the world? A test of differences by region and stability over time. Journal of Research in International Education, 13(2), 91-105.
Rubin, H. & Rubin, I. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage Publications, CA: Thousand Oaks.
Sarbaugh-Thompson, J.S. and Feldman, M.S. (1998). Electronic mail and organizational communication: Does saying “hi” really matter? Organization Science, 9(6), 685–698.
Schiller, J. (2003).Working with ICT". Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 171-185.
Schmitz, J., & Fulk, J. (1991). Organizational colleagues, media richness, and electronic mail: A test of the social influence model of technology use. Communication Research, 18, 487-523.
Seyal, A. (2012). A preliminary study of school administrators’ use of information & communication technologies: Bruneian perspective. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 8(1), 29-45.
Stone, N. J., & Posey, M. (2008). Understanding coordination in computer-mediated versus face-to-face groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 827-851.
Telem, M. (2003). Computerization of high school pedagogical administration–Its effect on principal-parents interrelations: A case study. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 2(3), 189-212.
Treem, J. W. Dailey, S. L. Pierce, C. S., Leonardi, P. M. (2015) Bringing Technological Frames to Work : How Previous Experience with Social Media Shapes the Technology’s Meaning in an Organization. Journal of Communication, 65, 396–422.
Van Den Hooff, B., Groot, J., & de Jonge, S. (2005). Situational influences on the use of communication technologies: A meta-analysis and exploratory study. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 4-27.
Webster, J., & Trevino L. K. (1995). Rational and social theories as complementary explanations of communication media choices: Two policy capturing studies. Academy of Management Journal, (36)8, 1544-1572.
Webster, J., & Trevino L. K. (1995). Rational and social theories as complementary explanations of communication media choices: Two policy capturing studies. Academy of Management Journal, (36)8, 1544-1572.
Weingart, L. R., Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2005). Quantitative coding of negotiation behavior. International Negotiation, 9(3), 441-456.
Wood, J. M. (2007). Understanding and computing Cohen’s kappa: A tutorial. WebPsychEmpiricist. Retrieved on May, 13 2015 from http://scholar.google.com.tr/scholar?q=Understanding+and+computing+Cohen%E2%80%99s+kappa%3A+A+tutorial&btnG=&hl=tr&as_sdt=0%2C5.
Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştirma yöntemleri. [Qualitative research methods in social sciences].Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Young, S., Beruh W. and Perry, S. (2008). The influence of technology in communication for school leaders: preferences, beliefs, and use. Planning and Changing, 39(1&2), 81-9.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Studies on Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Ali Sabancı This is me

Ebru Burcu Çimili Gök This is me

Gülnar Özyıldırım This is me

Publication Date

May 15, 2017

Submission Date

June 12, 2017

Acceptance Date

March 7, 2016

Published in Issue

Year 2017 Volume: 25 Number: 3

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ

APA

Sabancı, A., Çimili Gök, E. B., & Özyıldırım, G. (2017). School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future. Kastamonu Education Journal, 25(3), 1083-1098. https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ

AMA

1.Sabancı A, Çimili Gök EB, Özyıldırım G. School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future. Kastamonu Education Journal. 2017;25(3):1083-1098. https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ

Chicago

Sabancı, Ali, Ebru Burcu Çimili Gök, and Gülnar Özyıldırım. 2017. “School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future”. Kastamonu Education Journal 25 (3): 1083-98. https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ.

EndNote

Sabancı A, Çimili Gök EB, Özyıldırım G (May 1, 2017) School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future. Kastamonu Education Journal 25 3 1083–1098.

IEEE

[1]A. Sabancı, E. B. Çimili Gök, and G. Özyıldırım, “School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future”, Kastamonu Education Journal, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1083–1098, May 2017, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ

ISNAD

Sabancı, Ali - Çimili Gök, Ebru Burcu - Özyıldırım, Gülnar. “School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future”. Kastamonu Education Journal 25/3 (May 1, 2017): 1083-1098. https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ.

JAMA

1.Sabancı A, Çimili Gök EB, Özyıldırım G. School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future. Kastamonu Education Journal. 2017;25:1083–1098.

MLA

Sabancı, Ali, et al. “School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future”. Kastamonu Education Journal, vol. 25, no. 3, May 2017, pp. 1083-98, https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ.

Vancouver

1.Ali Sabancı, Ebru Burcu Çimili Gök, Gülnar Özyıldırım. School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future. Kastamonu Education Journal [Internet]. 2017 May 1;25(3):1083-98. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA75AY76RZ

Kastamonu Education Journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.

School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future

School Managers’ Electronic Communication Preferences and Their Implications for Future

Abstract

Keywords

Okul Müdürlerinin Elektronik İletişim Tercihleri ve Gelecek İçin Çıkarımları

Abstract

Keywords

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

IZ

Cite